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

A. On February 26, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with C Co., Ltd. with a maximum amount of KRW 4,900,000, and up to February 26, 2013 as of the expiration date of the contract. The Defendant acquired the above credit.

B. On September 5, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the payment of the acquisition amount, and rendered a judgment that “the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 4,700,000 and the amount calculated at the rate of 39% per annum from March 8, 2012 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”), which became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul's evidence Nos. 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. A lawsuit seeking ex officio determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit is allowed only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment of confirmation in order to eliminate the Plaintiff’s right or legal status in danger and in danger, and to eliminate such apprehension and risk.

However, in the case of this case, the ultimate objective of the plaintiff to achieve the judgment of this case is to exclude compulsory execution conducted by the defendant as executive title in light of the plaintiff's purport of claim, etc. Thus, the plaintiff's seek to exclude enforcement based on the judgment through the lawsuit of objection to claim is a direct means to resolve the dispute effectively and appropriately, and thus, the lawsuit of confirmation is not allowed.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case for which the plaintiff seeks confirmation of the existence of debt according to the judgment of this case does not have a benefit of confirmation.

3. As such, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.