beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Plaintiff’s assertion
On December 4, 2008, the Plaintiff was granted immunity by the Changwon District Court 2007Da2924, but the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming loans from the Seopo District Court 2015Gapo2072, and on June 23, 2015, the Plaintiff received a decision on performance recommendation with the effect that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 11,00,000 won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from March 1, 2001 to the delivery date of a duplicate of the complaint, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment,” and the said decision became final and conclusive.
According to the above immunity decision, the defendant's claim based on the decision of performance recommendation against the plaintiff is exempted, and thus, the confirmation of immunity is sought.
We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio by determination as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit.
On the other hand, in a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of a right. The benefit of confirmation is recognized only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment of confirmation against the defendant to eliminate such apprehension and danger (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da45140, Jul. 23, 2015). Even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, a decision of performance recommendation has become final and conclusive as to the Defendant’s obligation. Even if a decision of immunity has become final and conclusive under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, and the obligor’s obligation has been exempted from the obligor’s obligation, such decision does not lose the effect of executive title as to the exempted obligation as a matter of course, but is merely an substantial reason to exclude enforcement force of executive title through a lawsuit for objection (see Supreme Court Order 2013Ma1438, Sept. 16, 2013). Even if the Plaintiff’s claim for exemption becomes final and conclusive, it should be excluded from the Plaintiff’s compulsory execution by itself.