1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 20, 200, the Defendant entered into a credit card use contract with ELD Card Co., Ltd. and obtained credit cards and used them.

B. The Korea Asset Management Corporation, around 2003, acquired the credit card use-price claim against the Defendant from ELC Co., Ltd.

C. On May 13, 2005, the Plaintiff again acquired the credit card usage claim against the Defendant from the Korea Asset Management Corporation, and around that time, notified the Defendant of the assignment of the credit card assignment on behalf of the transferor.

On August 28, 2006, the Plaintiff filed a suit against the Defendant for the claim for the amount of acquisition by transfer as Cheongju District Court Branch 2006Gau17147, the above court rendered a decision on performance recommendation (hereinafter referred to as the “decision on performance recommendation of this case”) to the effect that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 6,639,792 won and 3,840,000 won which is calculated at the rate of 17% per annum from August 1, 2006 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter referred to as the “decision on performance recommendation of this case”), and the said decision on performance recommendation was finalized on September 14, 2006.

E. On June 19, 2012, the Defendant repaid KRW 50,000, out of the acquisition amount obligations against the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine ex officio the legality of the instant lawsuit, ex officio, as to the determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of a person who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in a case where the party who received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party files a lawsuit again against the other party to the previous judgment in favor of one party to the previous suit, the subsequent suit shall be deemed unlawful as there is no benefit of protection of rights. However, in exceptional cases, where it is obvious that the ten-year period of ex

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da74764 Decided April 14, 2006, etc.). According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff’s claim based on the decision of performance recommendation of this case was made on June 19, 2012 by the Defendant.