Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 74,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from August 11, 2009 to November 27, 2009, and thereafter.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The judgment of November 27, 2009 rendered that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 74,000,000 won and interest calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from August 11, 2009 to November 27, 2009, and 20% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment, to the day of full payment," which the plaintiff claimed against the defendant for the payment of the agreed amount based on the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant on August 24, 2007.
(A) No. 1-1, hereinafter referred to as “instant judgment”). B.
The original copy of the instant judgment was served on the Defendant on November 30, 2009, and the instant judgment became final and conclusive on December 15, 2009.
C. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on November 18, 2019 for the interruption of extinctive prescription of claims based on the instant judgment.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts found in the judgment on the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 74,00,000 won with payment order from August 11, 2009 to November 27, 2009, 20% per annum from the next day to May 31, 2019, and 12% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment. The completion of the extinctive prescription of the claim based on the judgment of this case was imminent, and the plaintiff filed a lawsuit again for suspension, and thus there is a benefit in the lawsuit.
3. The defendant's defense is asserted to the effect that the extinctive prescription of a claim based on the judgment of this case has expired, but the fact that the lawsuit of this case was filed on November 18, 2019, which is apparent that ten years have not elapsed since the date when the judgment of this case became final and conclusive, is obvious in the record. Thus, the defendant's defense is without merit.
4. The conclusion is that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.