면책확인
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption with the Suwon District Court and was declared bankrupt on November 10, 201, and was decided to grant immunity on February 18, 201 (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”).
However, it is sought to confirm the effect of immunity because it is not excluded from the target of immunity because it was omitted from the recognition of the obligation against the defendant at the time, but it was not recorded in the list of creditors in bad faith.
2. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of exemption from liability on the grounds that the grounds of the instant claim are identical to that of the Seoul Southern District Court 2016Kadan41085, however, the said court on January 3, 2017, “the Plaintiff withdraws the instant lawsuit, and the Defendant consents thereto. The costs of lawsuit are borne by each party” is recognized by a ruling of recommending reconciliation, which became final and conclusive on January 24, 2017.
Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because it is against the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive decision of recommending reconciliation.
(Additionally, according to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in Eul evidence Nos. 3 through 10, the defendant's claim to the plaintiff against the plaintiff is dismissed on May 9, 201, after the plaintiff was granted the decision of immunity of this case, since the defendant acquired the principal and interest claim of KRW 2,00,000 from the non-party KSO loan, and it is clear that the decision of this case does not affect the decision of immunity of the plaintiff). The decision of this case is unlawful and dismissed.