1. The part concerning the claim for confirmation of the existence of an obligation among the lawsuits in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant's District Court in Incheon for the plaintiff.

A. The ultimate goal is to exclude compulsory execution against the property owned by the Plaintiff with the judgment of the preceding case as the executive title. Thus, in order for the Plaintiff to achieve the above objective, there is no benefit to seek confirmation of the absence of an obligation, which is the basis of the preceding judgment, unless the Plaintiff files a lawsuit of objection against

Therefore, the part concerning the claim for confirmation of the existence of the obligation among the lawsuit in this case cannot be deemed to have a benefit of confirmation.

3. Determination as to the part of the objection raised

A. Determination as to the cause of the claim 1) Of the Defendants of the preceding case, the amount agreed upon by H, I, J, D, and F to the Defendant is as stated in attached Table 2, and the amount of judgment on the satisfaction of claim ±3,967,287 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from April 13, 2019 to the date of full payment. The Plaintiff’s principal amount = 3,967,287, 280 [2, 30.4, 205, 20, 205, 205, 205, 205, 205, 205, 206, 275, 205, 205, 206, 275, 205, 205, 206, 367, 287, 366, 2019]; therefore, the Defendants’ respective judgment on the satisfaction of claim 25.