임대차보증금(시효연장)
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 15,00,000 as well as its full payment from September 4, 2005.
1. On October 13, 2005, the judgment of the plaintiff as to the cause of the plaintiff's claim filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the claim for refund of lease deposit with the Daejeon District Court 2005Garo38660, and the above court rendered the judgment that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 15 million won and interest rate of 20% per annum from September 4, 2005 to the date of full payment." The above judgment is final and conclusive on November 2, 2005, and there is no dispute between the parties, and as long as the statute of limitations of the plaintiff's claim for the return of lease deposit is imminent, the plaintiff has the interest in the lawsuit of this case for interruption of the statute of limitations. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 15 million won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from September 4, 2005 to the date of full payment.
2. The phrase “claim which is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Act”) means a case where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted and fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Thus, if the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above Act even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, but if the debtor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the above Act even if he did not enter it in the list
The reason why a claim not entered in the list of creditors is excluded from the list of creditors, if there is a creditor who is not entered in the list of creditors, that creditor is deprived of the opportunity to file an objection, etc. to the application for immunity within the scope of the immunity procedure.