beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.06.21 2014가단44457

합의금

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

According to the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Act”), when any custodian, any rehabilitation creditor, any rehabilitation secured creditor, any shareholder, any equity right holder raises an objection during the inspection period or on the special inspection date, the details of the reported rehabilitation claims and the voting rights are confirmed (Article 166 of the Act). When the rehabilitation claims and any rehabilitation security right are entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors and any rehabilitation secured right, the entry therein shall have the same effect as a final judgment on all rehabilitation creditors, any rehabilitation secured creditor, any shareholder, any equity right holder (Article 168 of the Act). When the decision on discontinuation of rehabilitation procedures is final and conclusive, any entry therein shall have the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment on all rehabilitation creditors, any rehabilitation secured creditor, any shareholder, any other equity right holder (Article 168 of the Act). When the decision on discontinuation of rehabilitation procedures is final and conclusive, any entry in the table of rehabilitation creditors or the list of rehabilitation secured creditors on any confirmed rehabilitation claims and any rehabilitation security right shall be the same as the final and conclusive judgment on the debtor, and any rehabilitation creditor or any rehabilitation secured secured secured creditor creditor, any benefit in the lawsuit seeking seeking.

I would like to say.

In light of the evidence Nos. 5 and evidence Nos. 8 through 10, the purport of the entire pleadings is seen as follows: (a) the rehabilitation procedure was decided on August 25, 2014 in the rehabilitation case applied by the Defendant by the District Court 2014dan502; (b) but was decided on May 28, 2015 thereafter; (c) in the rehabilitation procedure, the Plaintiff reported the Defendant’s claim amounting to KRW 32,393,90, which was claimed against the Defendant as a rehabilitation claim; and (d) the Defendant, who was the debtor and the legal administrator, was the total amount of the rehabilitation claim.