1. According to the expansion of the purport of the claim by this court, the judgment of the first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant is against the plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming damages against the defendant (Seoul Central District Court 2008Gada128749), and on November 28, 2008, the judgment of the court below that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 700,000 won with 5% per annum from May 14, 2008 to November 28, 2008, 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 became final and conclusive as it is.

After December 18, 2008, " May 14, 2008" in the text of the instant judgment was corrected as " May 14, 2005."

[Grounds for recognition] The entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. Where a party to whom a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has been rendered files a lawsuit against the other party for the same claim as the previous suit in favor of the final and conclusive judgment, the subsequent suit is unlawful as there is no benefit

However, in exceptional cases where the ten-year period of extinctive prescription of a claim based on a final and conclusive judgment is imminent, there is a benefit in a lawsuit for the interruption of prescription.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2018Da22008 Decided July 19, 2018). B.

According to the above facts, since the ten-year extinctive prescription period has expired from the date the judgment of this case became final and conclusive, the plaintiff has a benefit in filing the lawsuit of this case for the interruption of extinctive prescription.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages amounting to KRW 700,000 and damages for delay calculated by applying the rate of 5% per annum from May 14, 2005 to November 28, 2008 and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

3. The plaintiff's claim should be accepted as reasonable.

The judgment of the first instance is just in conclusion with respect to a claim before the plaintiff expandss the purport of the claim in this court. However, according to the plaintiff's expansion of the claim in this court, the judgment of the first instance is modified as above.