1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 17, 2015, the Suwon District Court Decision 2015Da318142, which the Defendant filed against the Plaintiff, declared that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 4,230,506 won and the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum for KRW 1,587,052 from June 7, 2015 to the date of full payment,” which became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant judgment”). (b)

On April 5, 2016, the Plaintiff was granted immunity by Busan District Court 2015Da1853, and the above immunity became final and conclusive on April 20, 2016. The Plaintiff did not enter the Defendant’s claim (hereinafter “instant claim”) in the list of creditors while filing an application for immunity.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not.

In the process of being declared bankrupt and granted immunity, the Plaintiff is seeking confirmation of immunity on the ground that the Plaintiff was exempted from liability because the Plaintiff did not have omitted the claim in the list of creditors in bad faith.

Lawsuits for confirmation shall be allowed when there is infeasible danger in rights or legal status and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute.

As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s obligation to perform the instant obligation became final and conclusive by the instant judgment, and even if the immunity decision under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act became final and conclusive, the obligor’s obligation is exempted from the obligation to repay the obligor’s obligation, this does not necessarily mean that the enforcement title of the exempted obligation is void as a matter of course, but is merely an substantial reason to exclude enforcement power of the enforcement title through a lawsuit demanding objection.

Supreme Court Order 2013Ma1438 Decided September 16, 2013