1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff, whose enforcement title has res judicata effect, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on the claim for the price of goods at this court as the same cause of claim as the instant lawsuit, which is the same as that of the instant lawsuit.

On March 19, 2014, the above court notified the same purport as the purport of the instant claim, and the decision became final and conclusive on April 8, 2014.

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, where a party who received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party files a lawsuit against the other party to the previous suit identical to the previous suit in favor of one party to the previous suit, the subsequent suit is unlawful as there

In addition, when a decision in lieu of conciliation becomes final and conclusive, such decision has the same effect as a judicial compromise (see Articles 30 and 34 of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act), and a protocol of reconciliation has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment (see Article 220 of the Civil Procedure Act), and ultimately, a decision in lieu of conciliation becomes final and conclusive and conclusive, such

B. The Plaintiff already received a decision in lieu of conciliation against the Defendant and became final and conclusive, and thus has res judicata effect.

Nevertheless, the lawsuit of this case brought again as the same cause of claim is unlawful as there is no benefit of protection of rights.

C. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's resident registration number was omitted in the above decision and the defendant's application for correction was dismissed, and that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case additionally because it did not constitute compulsory execution without resident registration number.

However, if a defendant's resident registration number is required in compulsory execution as alleged by the plaintiff, it is necessary to vindicate the defendant's resident registration number according to the legitimate procedure, and it does not constitute a ground for filing a new lawsuit like the lawsuit

It is insufficient to say that the instant lawsuit has the interest in protecting the rights, solely on the grounds alleged by the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion