1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts (this is remarkable to the court);

A. The Plaintiff submitted the instant complaint on December 17, 2018, but did not affix revenue stamps.

B. Although the Plaintiff filed an application for a litigation for recognition (2018 A20), the Plaintiff was dismissed on December 19, 2018, and the Plaintiff’s immediate appeal (Seoul High Court 2019do1056) and reappeal (Supreme Court 2019Do647) were all dismissed, and the dismissal decision on July 2, 2019 became final and conclusive.

C. On September 18, 2019, the instant court issued an order to pay KRW 2,347,90,00, etc., but finally issued an order to pay KRW 819,300 on December 9, 201, and the Plaintiff received the final order to pay KRW 819,300 within seven days from the date of delivery of the order.

On the other hand, the duplicate of the complaint of this case was served on October 23, 2019, and the defendant submitted a written answer on December 2, 2019.

2. According to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 254 of the Civil Procedure Act, where a plaintiff fails to attach revenue stamps as prescribed by law to a complaint, the presiding judge shall set a reasonable period and order the plaintiff to correct the defects within such reasonable period, and where the plaintiff fails to correct the defects within the given period after receiving an order to correct revenue stamps, the presiding judge’s order shall dismiss the complaint. However, since the lawsuit cannot be corrected as illegal lawsuits even after the duplicate of the complaint was served and the lawsuit is pending, the lawsuit shall be dismissed by a judgment without holding any pleadings pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act

Examining the facts in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the instant suit continued to exist after being served with the Defendant, and the Plaintiff did not pay stamp even after seven days have elapsed since the date when the Plaintiff was served a notice of the order of correction of stamp, and thus, the instant suit constitutes an unlawful and unrecilable case.

Therefore, Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be decided by judgment.