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

A. On January 6, 2015, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order of loans (hereinafter “instant payment order”) with the instant court seeking the payment of loans. On January 6, 2015, the said court rendered a payment order with the purport that “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 20,860,000 and the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day after the payment order was served to the day of full payment, and the payment order with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall pay the expenses for demand procedure” (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The instant payment order was finalized on March 11, 2015.

B. On October 30, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for individual bankruptcy and exemption with the Daejeon District Court, and was declared bankrupt on December 4, 2014 by the said court under the lower court’s order 2014Hau2718, and on January 15, 2015, the decision to grant immunity was finalized on January 30, 2015 upon receipt of the decision to grant immunity under the above court’s order 2014Hau2721 (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”).

C. The list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of the decision on immunity of this case did not indicate the Plaintiff’s obligations indicated in the separate sheet, which are the above loan obligations against the Defendant (hereinafter “instant obligations”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Eul evidence No. 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. As to the lawsuit of this case seeking confirmation of the discharge of the obligation of this case arising from the above discharge decision filed by the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Daejeon District Court becomes aware of the omission of the obligation of this case after bankruptcy and exemption was granted, the court shall ex officio determine the legality of the lawsuit.

(b) Murder, a suit for confirmation shall be allowed in cases where there is any danger or lack existing in the position of rights or legal status, and the ruling of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the risk or omission, i.e., where there is a benefit in the protection of rights of confirmation.

However, even if the plaintiff is confirmed to have the effect of immunity by judgment, it is merely that of this case.