면책확인의 소
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion was omitted from the creditor's list in the bankruptcy and exemption case against the plaintiff due to the lack of knowledge of the existence of the obligation owed to the defendant for the same reasons as stated in the grounds of the claim in the separate sheet. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is justified.
2. If a lawsuit for confirmation is lawful ex officio as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, there should be interests in confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights, and the benefits of such confirmation should be recognized only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment against the defendant in order to eliminate the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status, and there is currently apprehension and danger in the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status.
However, according to the records of this case, the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff with the Seoul Central District Court 2013Gaso6093838, and on January 16, 2014, the defendant was sentenced to the judgment that "the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 16,975,689 won and 2,206,631 won which are calculated at the rate of 39% per annum from November 2, 2011 to the date of full payment," and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
Therefore, the Plaintiff appears to bring an action in this case for the purpose of preventing compulsory execution based on the above judgment. As above, the fact that there was immunity in the event of enforcement title does not automatically lose executory power, but merely becomes a substantial reason to bring an action of demurrer (see Supreme Court Order 2013Ma1428, Sept. 16, 2013). However, even if the Plaintiff is confirmed to have the effect of immunity by judgment, the Plaintiff’s apprehension and risk that it may be subject to compulsory execution from the Defendant is still not removed.
Therefore, the plaintiff could seek the exclusion of the executive force by filing an objection against the above judgment.