1. The Defendant’s KRW 42,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual 10% from January 1, 2010 to June 21, 2017, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. B filed a lawsuit seeking the selling price to the Defendant (Seoul Northern District Court 2006Da34302). On May 4, 2007, the said court rendered a decision in lieu of the conciliation as follows (hereinafter “decision in lieu of the conciliation of this case”).

“The Defendant shall pay KRW 42,00,000 to B by December 31, 2009. If the unpaid amount is not paid by the due date, the Defendant shall pay the unpaid amount plus damages for delay calculated at the rate of 10% per annum from the day following the due date to the day of full payment. B waives the remainder of the claim, while B and the Defendant shall waive each other’s claim under the sales contract No. 5 Dong 104, as stated in the cause of the claim.”

B. The decision in lieu of the above conciliation was finalized on June 9, 2007.

C. On April 17, 2015, B transferred a claim based on the decision in lieu of the instant conciliation to the Plaintiff, and around that time, notified the Defendant of the transfer.

[Reasons for Recognition] deemed confession (Article 150 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. If a protocol substituted for the conciliation of judgment becomes final and conclusive, it has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, such as a protocol of judicial conciliation, and res judicata takes effect between the parties. Thus, in principle, the parties cannot bring a new suit on the basis of the same subject matter of lawsuit, or in exceptional cases where there are special circumstances such as interruption of prescription, a new

As seen earlier, B had a claim against the Defendant based on the decision in lieu of the instant conciliation. However, since the Plaintiff transferred the above claim to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, the assignee, may be deemed to constitute a successor under Article 218(1) of the so-called Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff has the interest in filing a lawsuit against the defendant for the extension of the prescription period for the decision in lieu of the conciliation of this case. Thus, the defendant has the interest in filing a lawsuit against the defendant.