면책확인의소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, purport of the whole pleadings);
A. On May 23, 2006, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming a loan with the Seoul Western District Court 2006Kadan1556 against the Plaintiff and C, and on May 23, 2006, sentenced the Plaintiff (the Defendant’s title is the Defendant) to the judgment that “the Defendant (the Plaintiff’s title is the Defendant) shall pay to the Plaintiff 21,200,000 won with 5% per annum from September 3, 2002 to March 17, 2006, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment” (a non-litigation). The above judgment was finalized on June 24, 2006.
(hereinafter “instant judgment claim”). B.
On July 7, 2006, the Plaintiff received the application for immunity from the Seoul Central District Court 2006Hadan1913, 2006 (hereinafter “instant bankruptcy and application for immunity”) on bankruptcy and 2131 (hereinafter “instant bankruptcy and application for immunity”). The decision to grant immunity from January 31, 2007 (hereinafter “the decision to grant immunity”) was finalized on February 17, 2007.
C. The claim of this case was not indicated in the list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of the bankruptcy and application for immunity.
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. On July 7, 2006, the Plaintiff asserted the bankruptcy and application for immunity through a certified judicial scrivener office, prepared a list of creditors with respect to all creditors who are memory at that time, and thereafter came to know on March 18, 2014 that the Defendant was omitted in the list of creditors who should be served a decision to specify the assets with respect to the Defendant, and that the Defendant also came to know that the bankruptcy and application for immunity against the Plaintiff was in progress, the Plaintiff demanded the Plaintiff to transfer the promissory note claims against the Plaintiff and taken over them. Since the obligation against the Defendant was not written in bad faith, the Defendant’s claim against the Defendant should be deemed to have been exempted by the decision to grant immunity.
B. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff has the obligation to pay the judgment of this case.