The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case against the defendant is dismissed.

A. The electronic bill was issued on May 27, 2019 (hereinafter “instant electronic bill”) with the amount of January 28, 2019 as KRW 24,00,000, and the maturity date as of May 27, 2019 under the name of the Codefendant D, Inc., Ltd., E, and the Plaintiff’s order of endorsement assigned in sequence.

B. Although the Plaintiff presented a payment proposal as a final holder of the instant electronic bill, it was denied on the ground of non-transaction, and the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking the payment of the said electronic bill on August 23, 2019.

C. Meanwhile, on April 23, 2019, B received a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures as Busan District Court 2019 Ma1003, and on January 15, 2020, B obtained a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures from the above court.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. Any rehabilitation creditor who intends to participate in rehabilitation procedures under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”) shall report the rehabilitation claim (Article 148(1)); when an objection is raised against the reported rehabilitation claims, all of the objectors may file an application with the court for the final claim inspection judgment (Article 170(1)); and any person dissatisfied with the judgment may file a lawsuit of demurrer against the final claim inspection judgment.

(Article 171 (1) : Provided, That where any lawsuit on rehabilitation claims is pending at the time the rehabilitation procedures commence, any rehabilitation creditor shall report the rehabilitation claims and when any objection is raised to the reported rehabilitation claims, all of the objectors shall take over the litigation procedures as other parties to the lawsuit.

(Article 172(1). Therefore, filing a lawsuit claiming the implementation of a rehabilitation claim directly by a rehabilitation creditor without resorting to the rehabilitation procedure is unlawful, following the commencement of the rehabilitation procedure.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da221887, Jun. 29, 2017).