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

A. The Plaintiff: (a) performed a contracted construction from the Defendant; and (b) purchased a performance bond of the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. as stated in the purport of the claim; and (c) delivered the insurance policy to the Defendant; (d) claimed the defect and sought a claim for insurance premium against the guaranty insurance policy.

Although the purport of the Plaintiff’s claim is unclear, as long as the Defendant cannot prevent itself from claiming insurance premium against Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd., the instant lawsuit is understood to the effect that it would eventually deny the validity of the claim for insurance premium. This is so-called formative action, and there is no legal basis to recognize it, and such lawsuit is not permissible.

Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

B. Meanwhile, after the closing of argument in the instant case, the Plaintiff submitted an application for modification of the purport of the claim to the effect that “The Plaintiff’s obligation to pay insurance money to the Defendant based on the above guaranty insurance policy does not exist between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.”

The amendment of a claim can be made until the date of the closure of argument in the fact-finding court, unless there is a significant delay in litigation procedures (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da4416, Apr. 24, 1998). The Plaintiff’s application for amendment of the purport of the claim was submitted after the closing of argument, and as regards the original purport of the claim, the court ordered on April 24, 2018, “it is necessary to examine the legitimacy of the claim, considering whether there is a legal title to seek the denial of the claim for insurance premium itself, whether the court may order the denial thereof by judgment,” but it maintained the purport of the claim that the Plaintiff seeks the denial of the claim, as it is, is proceeding on July 6, 2018, and the pleadings have been closed, and the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay insurance money to the Defendant is not in itself nonexistent, and thus, the obligation to pay insurance money is an obligation.