면책확인
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the facts of recognition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) that the Plaintiff did not enter the instant debt in the creditors’ list at the time when immunity is granted by making an application for immunity as above, was caused by mistake by the applicant’s agent, and thus, the instant debt was also exempted. 2) The Defendant’s assertion became aware of the existence of the instant debt. As such, the instant debt constitutes “a claim that is not entered in the creditors’ list in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, and is excluded from the subject of immunity.
B. The phrase “claim that is not recorded in the list of creditors in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to a case where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, but fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Thus, if the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above provision, but if the debtor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the above provision even if he did not enter it in the list of creditors by
The reason why a claim that is not entered in the list of creditors is excluded from the list of creditors, if there is a creditor who is not entered in the list of creditors, the creditor is deprived of the opportunity to file an objection, etc. to the application for immunity within the scope of the immunity procedure, and accordingly, the creditor is exempt from the immunity without any objective verification of the grounds for non-permission of the immunity stipulated in Article 564 of the above Act.