beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.02.16 2016가단30728

면책확인

Text

1. The Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant (principal KRW 5,423,254 and interest thereon, delay damages, etc.) shall be all together.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 24, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a petition for bankruptcy with the Busan District Court Decision 201Hadan220 and the application for immunity from 201Ma220, the Plaintiff filed a petition for immunity from the above court on August 29, 2011, and was granted a decision to declare bankruptcy on October 28, 201, and the decision to grant immunity (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”) became final and conclusive around that time.

B. At the time of the application for bankruptcy immunity, the Plaintiff was jointly and severally liable for the loan obligations of financial institutions B.

The loan holders were Han-gu Mutual Savings Banks, but thereafter, the creditors are currently the defendant by taking over the loans of Solomon Co., Ltd., Solomon Co., Ltd, Solomon Co., Ltd., mentmena C&C, and the defendant acquired them in order. As of May 18, 2016, the principal and interest of the bonds as of May 18, 2016 are the principal and interest, etc.

C. The list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff in the above bankruptcy exemption trial is not indicated in the above claim (hereinafter “instant claim”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1 and 4 evidence (including numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the claim in this case constitutes a bankruptcy claim with a claim for property arising from a cause arising prior to the declaration of bankruptcy, and, barring any special circumstance, the obligor, who has been exempted, is exempted from all of the obligations owed to the bankruptcy creditors except for the distribution pursuant to the bankruptcy procedure, and thus, the claim in this case was exempted from liability. As long as the Defendant contests this,

B. The defendant's assertion (1) argues that the effect of the above immunity does not extend to the claim of this case, since the plaintiff was aware of the existence of the claim of this case at the time of applying for bankruptcy immunity and did not enter it in the list of creditors.

(2) Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, which provides judgment.