1. Article 136(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “The presiding judge may ask the parties questions, in fact or in law, and urge them to testify, in order to clarify the litigation relations.” Article 136(4) of the same Act provides, “The court shall give the parties an opportunity to state their opinions on the legal matters which are obviously deemed to be excessive by the parties.” Thus, in a case where it is evident that the parties have not proved due to negligence or misunderstanding or where there is no express dispute between the parties on the matters to be the issue, the court shall question the parties and urge them to testify, and where the court intends to determine the propriety of the claims on the grounds of a legal point of view that the parties were not aware of or have not anticipated at all, the court shall give the parties an opportunity to state their opinions

As such, it is an unlawful act of failing to exhaust all the duty of explanation to either party by failing to exhaust all the duty of explanation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Da50338, Sept. 11, 2008; 2016Da684, Jun. 23, 2016). 2.

The judgment below

The reasons and records reveal the following facts.

1) The defendant is a limited liability company (hereinafter referred to as "credit case").

B) On November 30, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works with respect to the Village Scenic Improvement Project. (2) On November 30, 2015, the Plaintiff received a provisional attachment order on the amount of the claim among the claim amount of KRW 31,368,810 against the Defendant for the payment of the price for the goods to be purchased by the New Zealand (hereinafter “instant contract for construction works”). The original copy of the decision is December 2, 2015.