1. A notary public against the plaintiff against the defendant, Law Firm C prepared on July 14, 2008, No. 1368.

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

(However, in light of the context, the “Defendant” in the annexed cause of claim refers to the Plaintiff of this case, and the “Plaintiff” in the same cause of claim refers to the “Defendant of this case,” and it is understood that the “Plaintiff” in the annexed cause of claim refers to the “Defendant of this case” (Article 208(3)1 and 257(1) of the Civil Procedure Act).

3. Ex officio determination on the benefit of confirmation is made on the benefit of confirmation of the instant lawsuit.

A lawsuit of demurrer is aimed at excluding the executory power of a title holder, and even if a judgment becomes final and conclusive, the res judicata does not extend to the relationship of rights under the substantive law which is the cause of the title holder.

Therefore, in a case where a debtor files a lawsuit for confirmation of existence of an obligation which forms the cause for the preparation of a notarial deed without filing a lawsuit for objection to a claim against a notarial deed, the mere fact that a lawsuit for confirmation of existence of an obligation may file an objection to a claim is not unlawful on the grounds that the lawsuit for confirmation of existence of an obligation has no interest in confirmation, unless its purpose is the sole exclusion of enforcement

(1) In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant had been subject to compulsory execution based on the authentic copy of the authentic copy of the notarial deed mentioned in paragraph (1) does not dispute the Defendant, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff has legal interest in seeking confirmation of the non-existence of the obligation described in paragraph (1) against the Defendant.