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

However, the Defendant filed a lawsuit as if the deposit against the Plaintiff remains in KRW 4 million in this court and received a favorable judgment in accordance with the Suwon District Court Decision 2015Gau1897, Suwon District Court. Thus, the Defendant sought non-permission of compulsory execution based on the above judgment.

2. The judgment of the defendant filed a lawsuit with this court seeking the payment of the deposit amount of KRW 4 million against the plaintiff, and the above lawsuit was initiated by service by public notice, and this court rendered a judgment in favor of the defendant on April 14, 2016 (the case number: Suwon District Court, Suwon District Court, 2015da18997), and the above judgment is obvious to the court that became final and conclusive on May 5, 2016.

In light of the above, in a case where an executive title, which is the object of an objection in a lawsuit of demurrer, is a final and conclusive judgment, the reason should have arisen after the closure of pleadings in the lawsuit, and even if an obligor was unaware of such circumstance and was unable to assert it before the closure of pleadings without fault, the circumstance that occurred earlier cannot be deemed as the ground for objection, even if the obligor was unable to assert it before the closure of pleadings (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da12728, May 27, 2005). The Plaintiff’s assertion is an circumstance that occurred before the closure of arguments in

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.