1. As to KRW 65,143,869 and KRW 19,929,449 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from December 21, 2013 to September 30, 2015.

1. In full view of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for wage payment (this Court 2007Gahap1657), and on May 22, 2008, "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 36,471,300 won and interest calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from March 15, 2007 to December 17, 2007, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment" (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"). The judgment of this case can be acknowledged as having been established on June 14, 2008, and the facts that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case with the court of this case for the interruption of extinctive prescription of claims based on the previous judgment of this case, which is obviously 10 years after the judgment of this case became final and conclusive, and that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case with the court of this case 2015.219.4

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 36,471,30 won with 5% per annum from March 15, 2007 to December 17, 2007, and 20% per annum from the next day to December 20, 2013 as follows: 45,254,38 won with 65,143,869 won with 65,143,869 won with 19,929,449 won with 20% per annum from the next day to December 20, 2013 with 65,183,837 won with 65,929,49 won with interest of 19,929,49 won with 20% per annum from the next day to December 20, 2015 with 15% interest per annum.

2. Although the defendant's assertion is disputed to the effect that there is no obligation to pay damages for delay, the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the defendant has res judicata effect, the parties cannot file a new suit on the basis of the same subject matter of lawsuit as the final and conclusive judgment in principle or in exceptional circumstances such as the interruption of prescription.