2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

Within seven days from the date of receipt of notice of the order, the order was issued to deposit KRW 10 million as security for the instant litigation costs. On July 14, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against this order, and the appellate court partially accepted the Plaintiff’s appeal on November 29, 2017, and rendered a decision that “the part of the first instance decision ordering the Plaintiff to provide security exceeding KRW 3,967,020” (this Court Decision 2017Ra1059), and the Plaintiff did not file a reappeal on December 11, 2017, and the said decision became final and conclusive as it is, and the Plaintiff did not provide security for KRW 3,967,020 to the Plaintiff from the date of receipt of the above decision until the appellate court declares this decision.”

In addition, since it is impossible to grasp the Defendants’ obligation to pay money based on what factual relations and legal basis, the cause of the claim cannot be deemed specified, and the part seeking the removal of the result and the performance of delivery of goods cannot be deemed to have been specified as the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim are not clear.

Although the plaintiff (Appointed Party) filed a lawsuit similar to the lawsuit in this case over several times, the fact that the plaintiff (Appointed Party) has received a new dismissal ruling for the reasons of the purport of the claim and the unspecified cause of the claim is significant in this court.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case against the Defendants by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) falls under the main sentence of Article 124 of the Civil Procedure Act, and at the same time, since it constitutes an unlawful lawsuit under Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act, and its defects cannot be corrected, it is so decided to dismiss it without holding any pleadings.