손해배상(소멸시효연장을 위한)
Incheon District Court Decision 2010Gaso81691 Decided June 24, 2010 between the plaintiff and the defendant (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff") shall be decided.
1. In addition to the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement of evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for damages as the Incheon District Court 2010 Ghana81691, and the above court rendered a favorable judgment on June 24, 2010 and recognized the fact that the above judgment became final and conclusive at that time. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case seeking confirmation of a judicial claim for the interruption of extinctive prescription of a claim based on the above judgment is reasonable and the benefit of confirmation is recognized.
The Defendant received a decision to grant bankruptcy immunity from Suwon District Court Decision 2019No432. Since the Defendant did not know the fact of the judgment and did not enter it in the list of creditors, the Defendant asserts that the obligation against the Plaintiff should be deemed exempted pursuant to the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act. However, as seen above, the subject matter of a new form of litigation seeking confirmation is limited to the legal relationship of interruption of prescription through a judicial claim for interruption of extinctive prescription with respect to a specific claim for which the judgment became final and conclusive without exclusion of the substantive existence and scope of the claim, and there is no need to deliberate on the existence and existence of the claim including the expiration of extinctive prescription and the substantive legal relationship such as the scope of the claim (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Da232316, Oct. 18, 2018). The Defendant’
2. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.