면책확인
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On May 6, 2010, the Plaintiff, who was in office as the representative director of C, as the Plaintiff, guaranteed the collateral guarantee (on May 7, 2010, KRW 84 million) (on September 8, 2010, KRW 100,000,000,000) for loans to D Co., Ltd., Ltd., Co., Ltd., Ltd. as the collateral guarantee (on September 8, 2010, KRW 120,000,000).
(hereinafter referred to as “each claim of this case” in total of the loan claims against D Co., Ltd.
D Co., Ltd. entered into a contract on December 30, 2013 to transfer each of the instant claims to E limited companies.
C. On April 28, 2016, the Plaintiff filed for bankruptcy and exemption with the court and was granted immunity ( Daegu District Court 2015:2870), and the aforementioned immunity became final and conclusive on May 13, 2016. The Plaintiff did not include D or E-liability companies in the list of creditors at the time of bankruptcy and application for immunity.
E Limited Company entered into a contract with the Defendant to transfer each of the instant claims to the Defendant on April 17, 2018, and transferred each of the instant claims to the Defendant on May 2, 2018.
E. On August 9, 2018, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for the payment order by asserting that the principal and interest of the instant claims are as follows, and the Gwangju District Court issued the payment order to the Plaintiff to the effect that the Plaintiff would pay each of the instant claims to the Defendant.
(Seoul High Court 200,000,000 won KRW 36,507,607,600,000, KRW 136,507,600,00 on September 8, 2010, totaling the principal and interest on the remaining principal of the loan on the first loan date, 17,691,691,409, KRW 67,422,902, KRW 100,00 on September 1, 2010.
F. On September 4, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the above payment order. Accordingly, on September 7, 2018, the Defendant applied for the implementation of the above payment order as a conciliation and the conciliation was conducted, but the conciliation was not completed (Seoul District Court 2018ss. 58642).