1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. On March 12, 2003, the Defendant lent KRW 26,000,000 to the Plaintiff and C (hereinafter “the instant loan claim”) and applied for the payment order against the Plaintiff and C as the Daegu District Court Branch Branch Branch Decision 2013 tea392.

On April 4, 2013 in the foregoing case, the payment order was issued that "the plaintiff jointly and severally with C pay KRW 26,000,000 to the defendant and its delayed damages." The above payment order was finalized on May 25, 2013.

On the other hand, on August 26, 2011, upon filing a bankruptcy and application for immunity, the Plaintiff was granted immunity on December 17, 2012 (hereinafter “instant immunity”), and the said decision became final and conclusive on January 1, 2013 ( Daegu District Court Decision 201Hau4853, 2011, 48533, and 2011, 201), and omitted the entry of the instant loan obligations in the list of creditors at the time of the application for immunity.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit, there must be interests in confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights. The benefits of confirmation are recognized only when the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment of confirmation against the Defendant to eliminate the risks of uncertainty.

The Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff does not automatically lose the effect of enforcement title solely on the fact that a claim based on the payment order that became final and conclusive and that, in the event there is an enforcement title, a immunity is granted. However, the Defendant’s claim is merely an substantive reason to exclude enforcement power of enforcement title through a lawsuit of objection.

(see Supreme Court Order 2013Ma1438, Sept. 16, 2013). Accordingly, even if the Plaintiff is confirmed to have the effect of immunity by judgment, the Plaintiff’s apprehension that it can be subject to compulsory execution from the Defendant is still eliminated.