The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

The Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the fact that the instant lawsuit was filed for the interruption of extinctive prescription of claims based on the instant notarial deed.

In a case where a claim becomes final and conclusive by judgment, “new form of litigation seeking confirmation” is allowed only to the effect that there is a “judicial claim” in addition to performance litigation as a subsequent suit for the interruption of extinctive prescription of a claim based on such judgment, namely, a “new form of litigation seeking confirmation” (hereinafter “relevant Supreme Court en banc Decision”) (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Da232316, Oct. 18, 2018).

[See] However, even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff’s claim seeking confirmation that there exists a judicial claim for the interruption of extinctive prescription is not a claim established by a judgment based on the instant notarial deed. However, in light of the fact that a notarial deed has an executory power and has no res judicata effect, unlike the final judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, there is a benefit in filing a lawsuit seeking confirmation identical with the contents of the notarial deed in order to obtain a judgment that has res judicata effect (see Supreme Court Decision 95Da22795, 22801, Mar. 8, 1996), it is difficult to deem that the instant lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff constitutes “new form of confirmation litigation” as permitted by the

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it as per Disposition.