1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff by the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2017 Ghana14025 Decided February 8, 2018.

1. The following facts are acknowledged as either of the parties to a dispute or as a whole by taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 and 3:

A. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for damages under this Court No. 2017 Ghana14025. On February 8, 2018, the said court rendered a judgment in favor of the Defendant: “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 1,94,116 won and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from March 28, 2017 to February 8, 2018, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment”; and thereafter, the said judgment became final and conclusive.

B. On December 9, 2018, the Plaintiff returned KRW 2,271,685, which is the full amount of principal and interest of the debt based on the said final judgment, to D Co., Ltd. entrusted for collection by the Defendant.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, since the defendant's claims based on the above final judgment have ceased to exist by repayment, barring any special circumstance, the executory power of the above final judgment should be excluded.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that the execution of the above final judgment should not be excluded, since the plaintiff has not yet been reimbursed the costs of lawsuit based on the above final judgment.

On the other hand, a judgment on the cost of lawsuit is limited to determining the existence of the obligation to reimburse the cost of lawsuit and ordering the payment thereof, and the amount thereof is subject to a decision on the determination of the amount of cost of lawsuit pursuant to Article 110 of the Civil Procedure Act upon request of the parties. Thus, a judgment on the cost of lawsuit cannot serve as the executive title of the claim to reimburse the cost of lawsuit only by the judgment on the cost of lawsuit,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Reda818 delivered on October 12, 2006). Defendant’s assertion cannot be accepted.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable and acceptable.