1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as shown in the annexed sheet of claim.

2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful.

A judgment with a declaration of provisional execution cannot be subject to a lawsuit of demurrer unless the judgment becomes final and conclusive (Article 44(1) of the Civil Execution Act). An obligor may, by an appeal, exclude the executory power of the judgment by disputing the existence or scope of a claim, and may be subject to a stay of execution.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da86403 Decided April 23, 2015 (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da86403, Apr. 23, 2015). As for the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2015Da6693, 2016Gahap10162 (Counterclaim) (hereinafter “the first instance judgment”), a final appeal was filed against the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2017Na20203, 2017Na202420 (Counterclaim) (hereinafter “the second instance judgment”), the second instance judgment was filed, and the final appeal is pending in this court as of the date of the said judgment, and as of the date of the said judgment, the final appeal is a significant fact that the final appeal is pending in this court.

(1) The plaintiff filed an appeal and a final appeal and received a decision of stay of execution, and received a decision of stay of execution and prevented each execution according to the judgment of the first and the second instances. However, the plaintiff seeks to exclude the enforcement of the judgment of the first and the second instances where a provisional execution is not finalized in this case, by raising an objection against the judgment of the first and the second instances where a judgment of provisional execution is not finalized. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because there is no eligibility or there is no benefit

3. Conclusion, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed.