1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff seeks confirmation that the Plaintiff’s obligation stated in the claim against the Defendant was exempted due to the same reasons as stated in the attached Form.

2. We examine ex officio the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

If a lawsuit for confirmation is lawful, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is recognized only when it is the most effective means to obtain a judgment from the defendant to eliminate such apprehension and danger, in danger, in the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status, and in removing such apprehension and risk.

According to the records, the defendant applied for a payment order against the plaintiff as Daejeon District Court 2016 tea8457 and received a payment order against the plaintiff on December 15, 2016, the plaintiff was ordered to pay KRW 6,500,000 to the defendant and delayed payment damages, and the payment order became final and conclusive around that time.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant's claim against the plaintiff is a claim based on the payment order for which the decision of immunity has become final and conclusive, and as such, there is no executory power but merely becomes a substantial reason to file a lawsuit of objection by the above decision of immunity.

(see Supreme Court Order 2013Ma1438, Sept. 16, 2013). Therefore, even though the Plaintiff could immediately seek an executory exclusion from the instant payment order by filing a claim objection against the instant payment order, seeking confirmation of exemption without filing a claim cannot be deemed as an effective and appropriate means to eliminate legal uncertainty risks, and thus, the benefit of confirmation is not recognized.

3. If so, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is unlawful, and thus, it is dismissed.