1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The case shall be transferred to the Seoul Eastern District Court.

purport, purport, and.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 5, 2013, the Plaintiff issued and delivered to the Defendant a promissory note, the face value of which is KRW 305,00,000, and the due date of which is October 20, 2013. On August 9, 2013, the Plaintiff prepared and issued a notarial deed stating the purport of the claim that no objection is raised even if compulsory execution is conducted under the said promissory note (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

B. On November 7, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the instant Notarial Deed with the Suwon District Court having jurisdiction over the Defendant’s domicile, and the first instance court partially accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on January 29, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] The absence of dispute or significant facts in this court, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Where an ex officio judgment title as to whether an exclusive jurisdiction has been violated is a notarial deed, a lawsuit of demurrer against such claim falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the court located in the location of the debtor’s general forum (Article 59(4) main text and Article 21 of the Civil Execution Act). Therefore, a lawsuit of demurrer against a claim based on the title of execution of the notarial deed of this case is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Seoul Eastern District Court with the plaintiff’s general forum (Seoul Songpa-gu and 102 Dong 102)

Article 21 (Judicial Proceedings) of the Civil Execution Act shall be subject to exclusive jurisdiction over judicial proceedings as provided for in this Act.

A lawsuit for an objection against a grant of execution clause, a lawsuit for an objection against a claim, or a lawsuit for objection against a grant of execution clause, shall be under the jurisdiction of the court in the location of a general forum of a debtor.

However, if no such court exists, the court shall have jurisdiction over the debtor pursuant to Article 11 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Nevertheless, the first instance court made a decision on the merits with regard to the filing of an objection to the claim of this case in violation of the exclusive jurisdiction. This is unlawful as it violates the main text of Article 59(4) and Article 21 of the Civil Execution Act.

3. Conclusion.