양수금
1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant B shall be dismissed.
2. Defendant A: (a) KRW 20,000,000 for the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on March 2, 2017.
In full view of the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including additional numbers) and the overall purport of the pleadings, the facts constituting the same cause of claim as indicated in the separate sheet (a debt under a loan transaction agreement around October 1997) are recognized, barring any special circumstance, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiff the unpaid amount and the delayed damages, as described in paragraph (2) of this Article.
Defendant B asserts to the effect that “A lawsuit against the Defendant is unlawful because he/she was granted a decision to grant bankruptcy or immunity.”
In light of the purport of the entire argument in the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, the above defendant is recognized as having been declared bankrupt and granted immunity by the Seoul Central District Court No. 2015Hadan3092, 2015, 3092, after the occurrence of the claim stated in the attached Form No. 1 (hereinafter “the claim in this case”).
Therefore, since the right and executory power of the claim of this case are lost, the part against the above defendant in the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because there is no benefit of protection of rights.
If so, the plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant B shall be dismissed, and the claim against the defendant A shall be accepted.