A. On May 26, 2009, the Do resident savings bank (hereinafter “Do resident savings bank”) filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff and B against the Do resident savings bank (hereinafter “Do resident savings bank”), and was sentenced by the above court on May 26, 2009 that “the plaintiff and B jointly and severally paid to the Do resident savings bank 98,403,953 won and 50,816,263 won per annum from February 13, 2009 to the day of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”). The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On March 27, 2012, the Do Private Savings Bank was declared bankrupt by the Chuncheon District Court 2012Hahap1, and the Defendant was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy of the Do Private Savings Bank on the same day.

C. On July 17, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a bankruptcy and application for immunity with the Changwon District Court Decision 2012Hadan1461, 2012, 1461, and 1461. The Plaintiff was declared bankrupt on December 10, 2013 by the above court, and was granted immunity on January 29, 2014. The aforementioned immunity became final and conclusive around that time (hereinafter “instant immunity”) and included Do private bank savings in the list of creditors submitted at the time of filing an application for bankruptcy and exemption.

Based on the instant judgment, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order as to the Plaintiff’s deposit claims against the Central Agricultural Cooperative on August 25, 2014, from the Jung Government District Court 2014TTT16720, which was based on the instant judgment.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6, 27 evidence, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above findings of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff is exempted from the full liability to the bankruptcy creditor with the decision to grant immunity of this case, and barring any special circumstance, compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case shall not be permitted.

B. The judgment of the defendant on the defendant's assertion is that the plaintiff entered the Do private savings bank in the creditor list at the time of the application for immunity of this case and erroneously entered the place of service.