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

A. The Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption from immunity in Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Hadan7885, 201Da7885, 201, and 7885, upon receipt of a decision to grant immunity on May 11, 201 (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”). The instant decision to grant immunity was 2012

5. It was finalized on 26.

However, in the above bankruptcy and exemption case, the plaintiff did not enter the defendant's obligation concerning the transfer money of this case in the creditor list.

B. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff to the Seoul Central District Court as to the claim for the amount of the assignee fee as 2015da530574, and the said court rendered a favorable judgment against the Defendant regarding KRW 59,343,253 as well as KRW 15,720,50 as to KRW 59,343 as well as the amount of KRW 15,720,50 per annum from July 1, 2015 to the date of full payment. The instant judgment became final and conclusive on August 8, 2015 due to the Plaintiff’s failure to file an appeal.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On May 11, 201, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the decision of immunity of the instant case was rendered and confirmed on May 26, 2011. The Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff constitutes a bankruptcy claim that occurred prior to the declaration of bankruptcy, and thus, the Plaintiff’s failure to enter the obligation regarding the instant amount in the creditor registry in the case of bankruptcy and exemption cannot be deemed a claim with bad faith omitted. Therefore, compulsory execution against the Defendant’s Plaintiff should be denied.

B. We examine whether the decision to grant immunity of this case can be a ground for objection to the decision of this case, and in the case where the decision is an executive title, the ground for objection may be limited to the case where the grounds for objection arose after the closing of argument, barring any special circumstance.

However, prior to the date of closing argument of the judgment of this case filed by the defendant against the plaintiff.