1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. In the Daegu District Court Decision 2007Kadan106204, which the Defendant filed against the Plaintiff et al., the above court rendered a judgment on January 11, 2008 that “the Plaintiff et al. shall pay 50 million won and delay damages to each of the Defendant,” and the above judgment was finalized on February 1, 2008.

(hereinafter “the first final judgment of this case”). (b)

In the Daegu District Court 2013Hadan3843 Bankruptcy and 2013 Ma3843 applied by the Plaintiff, the said court rendered a decision to grant immunity to the Plaintiff on February 11, 2014, and the said decision to grant immunity was finalized on February 26, 2014 (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”), and the Plaintiff’s list is the Plaintiff’s above.

Claim in subsection (1) was omitted.

C. On November 7, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, etc. for the extension of the extinctive prescription period of the first final and conclusive judgment in the instant case. On March 27, 2018, the said court rendered a judgment that “the Plaintiff, etc. jointly with the Defendant and jointly paid KRW 50 million and delay damages to the Defendant,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 24, 2018.

(hereinafter referred to as “the second final judgment of this case”). 【The grounds for recognition】 Each entry of Gap’s 1 through 5, and a significant fact to this court.

2. Whether the instant lawsuit is lawful, the Plaintiff asserts that “The Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant based on the instant first final judgment was lawful, and that “The Plaintiff’s obligation of KRW 50,000,000 under the monetary loan agreement of December 20, 207 and interest thereon and damages for delay was exempted from the obligation of KRW 77,616,438 pursuant to the decision of immunity of the instant case.”

Notwithstanding the confirmation of decision to grant immunity to a debtor in bankruptcy, where any claim is disputed whether a non-exempt claim, etc., the debtor may, by filing a lawsuit seeking confirmation of immunity, eliminate the existing apprehension and danger in his/her rights or legal status.

However, in relation to the creditors who hold executive titles for the exempted obligation.