Defendant B.

The main text of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that the obligor who has been exempted from the liability shall be exempted from all obligations to the bankruptcy creditors, except dividends pursuant to the bankruptcy procedures.

The exemption here means that the obligation itself continues to exist, but it is not possible to enforce the performance to the bankrupt debtor.

Therefore, when a decision to grant immunity to a bankrupt debtor becomes final and conclusive, a claim exempted shall lose the ability to file a lawsuit having ordinary claims (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da28173, Sept. 10, 2015). On August 13, 2015, Defendant B filed a petition for bankruptcy with the Busan District Court (2015Hadan70036) and the application to grant immunity (2015Ha7036, Apr. 12, 2016) in the above court, the above court declared bankrupt on April 12, 2016; the above decision to grant immunity was discontinued on the same day; and the above decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on June 29, 2016; the creditor of the above bankruptcy and exemption case described the management expense claim against the Plaintiff in the list of the creditors of the above bankruptcy and exemption cases in question in the list of the Plaintiff’s claims for the management expenses claim against the Defendant B in this court or it is obvious.

According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff's claim for the management fee against the defendant B was caused before the declaration of bankruptcy against the defendant, and thus the immunity decision of this case became final and conclusive, thereby losing the ability to file a lawsuit and executive force.

Of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B is unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights.

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. (i) The Plaintiff asserted that the cause of the claim pertains to KRW 29,582,317 of unpaid management expenses and late payment fees that the Defendants are liable to pay until April 2014. Therefore, the Plaintiff is jointly liable to pay the said management fees in accordance with the management rules.