1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. All plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.

3. The plaintiffs' total costs of litigation.

1. A lawsuit seeking confirmation of ex officio as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit is allowed when it is the most effective and appropriate means to fundamentally resolve the dispute, where the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is in danger and the confirmation is rendered.

The Plaintiffs asserted that the obligation of the Plaintiffs against the Defendant was partially extinguished due to repayment, etc. according to the instant conciliation protocol, and sought confirmation that the said obligation does not exist within the scope of said claim.

The ultimate purpose of the claim for confirmation is to block compulsory execution with the conciliation protocol of this case as an executive title. For this purpose, filing a lawsuit of demurrer, which is a special remedy procedure established by law, to exclude the effectiveness of enforcement title, and disputing the existence and scope of the debt in the litigation procedure is the most effective and appropriate means. The confirmation of the existence of the debt cannot be directly and fundamentally resolved, and thus, there is no benefit in confirmation.

[Plaintiff B] A separate lawsuit of demurrer is pending in this Court (original) 2019Na11725). 2. The instant lawsuit is unlawful as it is concluded, and thus, the judgment of the first instance court, which has different conclusions, is revoked and all of the plaintiffs’ lawsuits are dismissed.