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

A. The Plaintiff, following the declaration of bankruptcy on August 10, 2006, was granted immunity on August 20, 2007.

The decision to grant immunity is the same year.

9.5. Finality was finalized (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2006Hadan13640, 2006 14513). At that time, the obligation of this case, which is a joint and several surety obligation for the Defendant, was omitted.

B. On May 7, 2009, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for performance of the instant obligation and received a favorable judgment on November 18 of the same year.

The above judgment became final and conclusive on December 22 of the same year.

(Seoul Central District Court 2009Gahap51139, hereinafter referred to as the "former Lawsuit in this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap's 1 through 3, 5 (including paper numbers), Eul's 4, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

2. Although the purport of the plaintiff's assertion is not that the plaintiff omitted the debt of this case in bad faith at the time of the decision on immunity, the defendant tried to enforce execution by making the judgment of the previous suit of this case an executive title after the judgment of the previous suit of this case became final, it is necessary to confirm that the debt of this case was exempted.

3. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

If a lawsuit for confirmation is lawful, it shall have the benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights.

In addition, the benefit of confirmation is recognized only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a confirmation judgment against the defendant when the plaintiff's rights or legal status in present unstable danger exists and removing such apprehension danger.

Notwithstanding the above decision of immunity, the judgment of the previous suit of this case becomes final and conclusive as seen earlier, and the fact that there was a immunity in the event of enforcement title does not automatically lose its enforcement power, but is a substantial reason to bring an objection suit by the above immunity decision.