대여금
1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant B shall be dismissed.
2. Defendant C: (a) KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff; and (b) as to the amount, KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff.
1. Whether the plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant B is legitimate
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion against Defendant B lent to Defendant B a total of KRW 110 million on February 10, 2010, KRW 10 million on March 10, 2010, and KRW 70 million on March 15, 2010, and KRW 10 million on March 15, 2010 (== KRW 30 million on KRW 170 million on the last day of each month), and the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of loans, such as the written claim, is asserted to have agreed to pay KRW 650,00,000 on the interest at the end of each month. As to the instant lawsuit, the Defendant B entered in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors for the Plaintiff’s claim (hereinafter “instant claim”), the lawsuit against Defendant B is unlawful.
B. According to the relevant legal principles and Articles 600(1)3 main sentence, 603, and 604 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, when a decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures has been rendered, all acts of receiving or demanding repayment of individual rehabilitation claims that are entered in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors shall not be performed, and the confirmation of individual rehabilitation claims shall be based on an objection to the details of the list of individual rehabilitation creditors and the final judgment on the final judgment on the individual rehabilitation procedures, etc. Where any confirmed individual rehabilitation claims are entered in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors, such entry shall have the same effect as the final judgment, and when a decision to discontinue individual
In light of the contents of these regulations and the nature of individual rehabilitation procedures, which are collective debt settlement procedures, and the purport of the final judgment on a final judgment on an individual rehabilitation procedure, even if the proviso of Article 600(1)3 excludes litigation from the act of suspension or prohibition by the decision on the commencement of individual rehabilitation procedures, it shall be deemed to constitute individual rehabilitation claims that are recorded in the list