1. Based on the Defendant’s decision on the amount of litigation costs set forth in Incheon District Court Branch Decision 2015Kao10170 against the Plaintiff.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, the Seoul District Court Branch of the Incheon District Court (Seoul District Court Branch of 2015Kadan4605). On September 15, 2015, the said court dismissed all the Plaintiff’s claims, and rendered a judgment against the respondent that the litigation costs should be borne by the Respondent. The said judgment became final and conclusive around that time. (2) On December 1, 2015, the said judgment was rendered final and conclusive. (3) The Defendant’s application for confirmation of the amount of litigation costs seeking to determine the amount of litigation costs to be reimbursed to the Defendant as KRW 4,115Kadan10170, the amount of litigation costs to be reimbursed by the Defendant to the Defendant was KRW 4,115,200, and the judicial assistant belonging to the said court rendered a decision that the amount of litigation costs to be reimbursed by the Plaintiff to the Defendant on December 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant decision”).

3) Although the Plaintiff filed an immediate appeal against this, the said court approved the instant decision by the judicial assistant officer on January 14, 2016. The Plaintiff appealed against the said authorization decision and filed an appeal with the Incheon District Court 2015Ra5012, but on May 3, 2016, the appeal was dismissed by the said court. The instant decision became final and conclusive on June 21, 2016. (4) The Plaintiff deposited KRW 4,108,000 as the Defendant for the instant decision with the amount of litigation cost KRW 1636, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, since the obligations pursuant to the decision of this case, which the plaintiff had borne against the defendant, were all extinguished by deposit, compulsory execution against the plaintiff, whose executive title is the decision of this case, shall be dismissed.

2. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.