beta
(영문) 제주지방법원 2017.06.01 2016나1229

대여금등

Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 17, 1996, the Plaintiff lent KRW 10 million to B on October 17, 1996, at the interest rate of 13.5% per annum, at the interest rate of 20% per annum, at the interest rate of delay damages, and at the due date of October 7, 1998.

(hereinafter “The First Loan Agreement”). On November 27, 1997, the Plaintiff extended an additional amount of KRW 8 million to B, at interest rate of KRW 13.5%, interest rate of KRW 20% per annum, and due date of repayment on May 27, 1998 (hereinafter “the Second Loan Agreement”) (hereinafter “the Second Loan Agreement”). (b) The Plaintiff extended a loan to B on November 27, 1997 (hereinafter “the instant loan obligation”).

The Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s debt incurred by the first and second monetary loan contract.

C. Other creditors filed an application for an auction to exercise the security right against the Defendant’s property (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), and at that auction procedure, the Plaintiff received dividends of KRW 7,767,708 on July 13, 201, and appropriated the remainder principal of the second monetary loan contract for consumption and loan contract for repayment of KRW 5,983,830 and KRW 1,734,527, which is part of the principal of the second monetary loan contract for consumption and the principal of the first monetary loan contract.

(s) 49,351 won was appropriated for other expenses. D.

The Defendant applied for bankruptcy and immunity as Seoul Central District Court 201Da9507 and 201Hadan9507, and was granted immunity on April 19, 2013, and the said decision became final and conclusive on May 8, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant decision on immunity”). The list of creditors of the instant decision on immunity did not state the Plaintiff’s claim.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3 and Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "any claim on the property that has arisen before the debtor is declared bankrupt shall be a bankruptcy claim," and Article 566 of the same Act provides that "the exempted debtor shall be excluded from the distribution by the bankruptcy procedure."