1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The fact that the Plaintiff was granted decision to grant immunity by Suwon District Court 2013 4733 on August 26, 2014 and that the said decision became final and conclusive on September 12, 2014 is no dispute between the parties.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and the judgment on the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case

A. The Plaintiff asserts that according to the above immunity decision, the Defendant’s obligation to pay for the goods stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendant (hereinafter “instant obligation”) was also exempted, and sought confirmation thereof.

B. A lawsuit for confirmation is recognized in cases where obtaining a judgment on confirmation of the legal relationship between the parties concerned is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s anxiety and risk as to the legal relationship.

However, in relation to the instant debt, the Defendant had already filed an application for a payment order with the Incheon District Court Branch Branch Kimpo-si, 2017Ka212, and the Plaintiff’s objection and the fact that the lawsuit is proceeding under this Court’s 2017Kadan7004 upon the Defendant’s filing of the lawsuit is a substantial fact with this court. Thus, the Plaintiff’s winning of the lawsuit by responding to the said lawsuit is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s anxiety and risk, and it is not the most effective and appropriate means to obtain the confirmation of discharge by the instant case separate from the response to the lawsuit in question.

C. Home Affairs, the purpose of the Plaintiff’s filing of the instant lawsuit is to exclude compulsory execution of the judgment on the purchase price of goods by the Incheon District Court 2010Kadan96835 decided in favor of the Defendant.

Even if the plaintiff should seek the exclusion of the executory power of the above judgment through a claim objection suit. Therefore, seeking the confirmation of exemption from the obligation of this case cannot be deemed as an effective and appropriate means to eliminate the plaintiff's legal instability, and thus, the benefit of confirmation is not recognized.

3. If so, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is recognized as a benefit of confirmation.