1. The plaintiffs and the Japanese public prosecutor's office of the Japanese public prosecutor's office of Japan in 2014.

1. The plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the prosecutorial office of the ASEAN District Court of 2014 (No. 26) 2014 (No. 26) (a) against the prosecutorial office of the ASEAN. On October 8, 2014, the plaintiffs recognized that "1. The judgment of the court below was finalized on October 23, 2014 that "the plaintiff A is the deceased E (Korean nationality and last address No. 17-701, No. 17-701, and January 21, 2014 (No. 26)."

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine the judgment on the cause of the claim, and there was no fact that Korea denies Japan's jurisdiction under the law or treaty, and there was no evidence to find that Japan's judgment did not violate Korea's good morals and other social order, and no other evidence exists to find that the above court did not summon the prosecutor's office of the ASEAN District Prosecutors' Office to the defendant of the above case. Furthermore, the conditions for Japan's judgment to be executed are Korea's same as Korea's case's case's case's case's case's execution.

Therefore, the judgment on the above recognition claim in Japan is valid in Korea as it satisfies all the requirements of Article 217 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.