1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. We examine ex officio the lawfulness 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 Decisions 87Meu1761 Decided November 10, 1987, and 2005Da74764 Decided April 14, 2006). According to the overall purport of the records and pleadings, the above court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff in the Suwon District Court Sung-nam Branch 2009Gadan9200 Decided that the Plaintiff brought a lawsuit against the Defendant. The above judgment became final and conclusive on July 17, 2009, and the Plaintiff was granted with the execution clause above on August 13, 2009, but did not perform compulsory execution, and it is recognized that the Plaintiff applied for the payment order of this case for the period of ten years after the statute of limitations of the above final and conclusive judgment. It is evident in the record that the Plaintiff applied for the payment order of this case.

If so, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is brought after the expiration of the statute of limitations, and thus, it cannot be viewed as an exceptional case of benefit of lawsuit.

2. Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is illegal as there is no benefit of lawsuit.