1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Plaintiff’s assertion

The Defendant had a loan claim of KRW 51,00,000 (hereinafter “loan claim of this case”) against the Plaintiff. In this regard, around 2004, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff and the payment order became final and conclusive.

After that, the Plaintiff was declared bankrupt by the Chuncheon District Court 2013Hadan687, and the decision to grant immunity was confirmed on March 6, 2014 upon receipt of the decision to grant immunity from 2013Ma686.

In the course of bankruptcy and immunity, the Plaintiff omitted the instant loan obligations in the course of making a list of creditors, but this ought to be viewed as a negligence and as a result, the Plaintiff’s above loan obligations against the Defendant were exempted.

However, the Defendant filed seven payment orders with the Plaintiff seeking the payment of the instant loan claim after the decision on immunity of the instant case (Yancheon District Court Decision 2014 tea 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, and 412), and each payment order became final and conclusive.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the validity of immunity against the Defendant regarding the Plaintiff’s obligations against the Defendant under each of the above payment orders finalized.

We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the determination of the legality of the instant lawsuit.

A lawsuit for confirmation is recognized in the case where it is the most effective and appropriate means to determine it as a confirmation judgment in order to eliminate such apprehensions when the legal status of the plaintiff is unstable.

In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement No. 1 and No. 2 of the evidence No. 1 and No. 2, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the fact that the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on March 6, 2014 upon the bankruptcy and the decision to grant immunity under the Chuncheon District Court Decision 2013Hau687, 2013 and 686, as alleged by the Plaintiff, and the fact that the instant loan claim was a claim arising prior to

On the other hand, in full view of the contents of evidence Nos. 3 through 9, the defendant's monthly support against the plaintiff in Chuncheon District Court.