The lawsuit of this case concerning the claim for the confirmation of existence of an obligation shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff.

1. Indication of claims: It shall be as shown in attached Form; and

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. A lawsuit seeking confirmation of rejection portion requires the benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is recognized when a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status in danger and danger existing (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da208255, Mar. 15, 2017). If the enforcement force of the notarial deed of this case is excluded, the Defendant is not a compulsory execution with the title to execute the notarial deed of this case, so it is no longer a compulsory execution against the Defendant. As such, seeking exclusion of the enforcement force of the notarial deed of this case would be a direct means to resolve disputes effectively and effectively, and thus, seeking confirmation that there is no obligation based on the notarial deed of this case does not have any benefit of confirmation

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da63509 Decided August 19, 2015)