Any property claim that accrues on the grounds before the commencement of rehabilitation procedures is a rehabilitation claim (Article 118 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act), which is a rehabilitation claim (Article 118 of the same Act), is confirmed as a rehabilitation claim through the submission of a list of rehabilitation creditors, etc. or the report of claims by rehabilitation creditors, etc., and the right is recognized only within the scope prescribed by the rehabilitation plan and is not prescribed in the rehabilitation plan (Article 251 of the same Act). The Seoul Central District Court commenced rehabilitation procedures for the rehabilitation company on June 17, 2014. The fact that the Seoul Central District Court issued a decision to authorize the rehabilitation company after the instant lawsuit was filed is that the Plaintiff is either the Plaintiff or this court, and that each promissorysory note claim

Therefore, it is unlawful for the plaintiff to seek payment of promissory notes against the rehabilitation company by means of a performance suit, only within the scope recognized in the rehabilitation plan through the report of rehabilitation claims, etc., as stipulated in the rehabilitation plan.

[Although it is unclear whether the right to each of the Promissory Notes of this case is recognized in the rehabilitation plan, it is not possible to separately claim payment against the rehabilitation company regardless of whether the right is recognized in the rehabilitation plan in accordance with the above legal principles]

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the attached Form;

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Judgment made by deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. Conclusion, Defendant Rehabilitation Company, among the instant lawsuits.