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

A. On February 5, 2004, the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for the claim for reimbursement amounting to Busan District Court Branch 2003Gaso45058, Busan District Court Branch 2003Gaso decided that the plaintiff shall pay 1.3 million won to the defendant and its delay damages. The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter referred to as "the judgment of this case"). (b)

On March 9, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2010Da4336, and was granted immunity on August 1, 201, and the said immunity became final and conclusive on August 17, 2011.

C. In the above bankruptcy and exemption case, the plaintiff against the defendant in the list of creditors.

The claim for reimbursement stated in the subsection was not stated.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff did not recognize the existence of the claim for reimbursement of this case at the time of the bankruptcy and application for immunity, and omitted it in the list of creditors and did not neglect it in bad faith, and therefore, the above debt was exempted from immunity by the decision on immunity of this case.

3. The defendant's judgment on the main defense of this case asserts that the plaintiff's claim of this case in the stage of compulsory execution is unlawful and should be dismissed.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is not recognized only by the fact that there is a dispute over legal relations between the plaintiff and the defendant, but it is recognized that it is the most effective and appropriate means to determine the plaintiff's legal status as a confirmation judgment to eliminate the unstable risk when

On the other hand, immunity under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act became final and conclusive.

Even if the executive titles are not naturally invalidated, and if it is intended to exclude the executive titles, an action of objection shall be brought against the claimant.