1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

If the plaintiff asserts that the obligation described in the claim against the defendant was exempted by the final decision of immunity on himself/herself, he/she shall seek confirmation.

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is recognized only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment against the defendant in order to eliminate the risk of inemersion in the plaintiff's rights or legal status.

However, as revealed in the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the payment of loans against the Plaintiff as the Busan District Court Branch Branch Decision 2016Ga2897, May 12, 2016, which rendered a judgment that “the Plaintiff refers to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff means the Defendant in the instant case. The Plaintiff shall pay KRW 32,580,990 and delay damages therefor.” This judgment can be acknowledged as having become final and conclusive on June 15, 2016. Accordingly, the instant lawsuit aims to exclude compulsory execution with enforcement with enforcement title with the said judgment No. 2016Ga2897. Even if the Plaintiff is confirmed as having the effect of immunity by judgment, the effect of the above judgment can not be excluded.

Therefore, it cannot be said that the Plaintiff’s seeking the confirmation of discharge as a lawsuit in this case is an effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s legal instability, separate from seeking the exclusion of the executory power of the above executive titles through a lawsuit of demurrer.

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.