A. After the executive titles against the Plaintiff (this Court Decision 2012Gahap8325 decided Apr. 10, 2013; hereinafter “instant executive titles”) of the Defendant were duly constituted, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision to grant bankruptcy immunity (hereinafter “the instant decision to grant immunity”) to the Plaintiff at the Seoul Central District Court on July 28, 2016 upon the Plaintiff’s bankruptcy and application to grant immunity, and on August 28, 2016, the fact that the instant decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive as is on August 2013, 2013 is not a dispute between the parties, and thus, barring any special circumstance, the Plaintiff’s liability for the Defendant’s obligation indicated in the instant decision to grant immunity on the executive titles, etc. of this case ought to be deemed lawful exemption.

B. As to the above, the defendant's claim indicated in the executive title, etc. of this case is disputed to the purport that at the time when the immunity decision of this case is made, the plaintiff constitutes so-called "non-exempt claim" as the "claim not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith". However, it is insufficient to acknowledge this point solely with the partial entries of Gap 4-6 and Eul and part of the plaintiff's personal examination result, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, the defendant's argument that the defendant'

2. According to the conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim for confirmation of exemption of this case based on the decision to grant exemption of this case is legitimate, and thus, accept it as is.