Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The gist of the cause of the claim was omitted from the obligation to the Defendant at the time of the application for immunity and its bankruptcy, and it was known that the Plaintiff had recently been notified by the Defendant that compulsory execution would be carried out. The Plaintiff’s omission of the obligation to the Defendant was not by bad faith, but by seeking confirmation of the exemption from liability against the Defendant.
2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not, ex officio, as to the determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.
In order to have the benefit of confirmation in a lawsuit for confirmation, there should be a danger proposal existing in the rights or legal status of the complainant according to the legal relationship, and in order to eliminate the risk problem, it is necessary to immediately be confirmed by the confirmation judgment covering the legal relationship, and it should be the most effective and appropriate means.
Meanwhile, even if a decision to grant immunity under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act becomes final and conclusive, and the obligor’s obligation is exempted, this does not necessarily mean that the enforcement title with respect to the exempted obligation naturally loses its effect. However, a claim objection suit is merely an substantive reason to exclude enforcement power of enforcement title.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 2013Ma2429, Feb. 13, 2014; Supreme Court Order 2013Ma1438, Sept. 16, 2013). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the instant lawsuit appears to have been brought for the purpose of preventing enforcement procedures by obtaining confirmation of the Plaintiff’s exemption of each obligation against the Defendant.
However, the most effective means of the plaintiff preventing compulsory execution is not to file a lawsuit of confirmation of exemption, but to file a lawsuit of objection, so long as it does not go through other remedy procedures excluding the execution power of the original judgment with the defendant's executory power against the plaintiff, the plaintiff shall do so.