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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. At around 2005 to 2006, the Plaintiff received from the Defendant a certificate of borrowing KRW 1 million, a certificate of borrowing KRW 1.3 million, a certificate of borrowing KRW 1.5 million, a certificate of borrowing KRW 1.5 million, a certificate of borrowing KRW 4 million, a certificate of borrowing KRW 4 million, and a certificate of borrowing KRW 6 million, a certificate of borrowing KRW 4 million.

B. On January 22, 2009, the Defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (2009da4963, hereinafter “instant individual rehabilitation procedure”) with the Daegu District Court, and received a decision to authorize the commencement of rehabilitation procedure on August 5, 2009 and the repayment plan on June 7, 2010 from the above court, and became final and conclusive around that time with the decision to grant immunity on May 20, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The plaintiff asserts that, in addition to the claim of KRW 4 million in the name of the plaintiff stated in the above individual rehabilitation application, the defendant borrowed KRW 5.8 million from the plaintiff, and the defendant claimed the above KRW 5.8 million against the defendant, as to the lawsuit of this case against the defendant, the defendant, upon completion of repayment according to the repayment plan in the individual rehabilitation procedure and the decision of immunity is confirmed at that time, and the above decision of immunity becomes final and conclusive, and its effect is limited to the claim that the plaintiff seeks by the lawsuit of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "claim of this case"). Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

B. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the claim of this case sought by the Plaintiff lost the right and executory power of filing a lawsuit with ordinary claims according to the above immunity decision. Thus, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case seeking payment is unlawful as there is no benefit of protecting the rights.

The plaintiff does not enter the plaintiff's claim in the list of rehabilitation creditors by negligence with knowledge of the existence of the plaintiff's claim at the time of application for individual rehabilitation.