1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. In fact, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the settlement of accounts with the Changwon District Court Heading 2007Kadan9510, which was sentenced to a favorable judgment on March 7, 2008, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 25, 2008 (hereinafter “final and conclusive judgment of a prior suit”).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the pertinent lawsuit has res judicata effect on the final and conclusive judgment, in cases where the relevant party who received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the said party files a lawsuit against the other party for the same claim as that of the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the said party, the subsequent

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.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2018Da22008, Jul. 19, 2018). According to the facts acknowledged earlier, extinctive prescription of a final and conclusive judgment in a prior suit was completed on March 25, 2018.

However, it is apparent in the record that the instant lawsuit was filed on April 5, 2019, which was the same content as the final and conclusive judgment of the previous suit, after the extinctive prescription has expired, barring any special circumstance, there is no benefit in the protection of rights to seek an extension of the prescription period.

In addition, even if the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order on May 17, 2016 based on the above payment order, the extinctive prescription is interrupted due to seizure, and the ground for interruption ceases to exist. The seizure is the first stage of compulsory execution that the execution agency prohibits the disposal of the debtor’s property based on a final and conclusive judgment or other execution title for the purpose of executing monetary claim, and the cause for suspension ceases to exist. Therefore, the extinctive prescription of the above claim is again to run from the time when the Plaintiff completed the collection of claims based on the above seizure and collection order.