1. The judgment of the Changwon District Court of March 24, 2000 against the plaintiff of the defendant (C) is based on the judgment of the case of the 2000 Ghana2983 delivered on March 24, 200.

1. On March 24, 200, the non-party C filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for the claim for the amount of the transfer payment under this court's 200 Ghana2983, and the decision of this court rendered on March 24, 200 that the plaintiff shall pay to the above C the amount of KRW 20 million and the amount equivalent to 25% per annum from March 11, 2000 to the date of full payment. The decision became final and conclusive on April 25, 200, and the fact that the defendant acquired the above claim from the above C and obtained the succession execution clause after the transfer of the claim from the above C does not conflict between the parties or is significant in this court.

2. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the statute of limitations has expired as the cause of the instant claim, the Defendant received the order of seizure and collection from the Suwon District Court 2016TTTTA on July 21, 2016. The Plaintiff filed a complaint on August 17, 2016, but the appeal was dismissed on August 22, 2016, but the Defendant received a decision to register in the defaulters’s list as Seoul Southern District Court 201Ka-Ma3365, and the Defendant was also subject to the Seoul Southern District Court 201Ka-Ma3365, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion to the effect that the statute of limitations has been interrupted. However, the foregoing grounds of the Defendant’s assertion do not have the effect of suspending the statute of limitations as a seizure after the expiration of ten (10) years from the date the above judgment became final, or cannot be a ground for suspending the statute of limitations (registration in the defaulters’ list).

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking non-permission of compulsory execution based on the above final judgment is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.