A. On May 7, 2007, the Plaintiff drafted a notarial deed of debt repayment (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) to the Defendant on the third day of the law firm, through a proxy C, for a debt repayment of KRW 50 million to the Defendant.

B. The Plaintiff filed an application for immunity for bankruptcy with the Daegu District Court 201Hadan1392, 1392, and 1392, and rejected the exemption, and the decision became final and conclusive on October 23, 2014 upon receipt of the immunity decision in the Daegu District Court 201Ra626 (hereinafter “instant immunity decision”). The Plaintiff omitted claims based on the Defendant and the instant notarial deed in the list of creditors of the instant case.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 3 of Evidence Nos. 2-1, 2, 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff omitted the defendant's claim in the creditor list in the course of the decision on immunity of this case, but the plaintiff lent his name to C and had C operate the D Hospital, and the notarial deed of this case was prepared by C, which is the actual debtor, in the course of its operation, by taking the form of the plaintiff's representative, and therefore, he merely took the existence of his claim and did not omit his claim intentionally or in bad faith. Thus, the above claim should be exempted from the immunity of this case, and therefore, compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case shall not be permitted.

B. Therefore, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the Health Team, Gap evidence No. 1, and evidence No. 2-1, No. 2, and 3 as a whole, the plaintiff lent his name in the management of the D Hospital, and the notarial deed of this case was also prepared by the plaintiff as the representative of the plaintiff, and the plaintiff did not participate in the preparation process, and the plaintiff was subjected to bankruptcy and immunity as mentioned above, and the number of creditors as stated in the above decision was reached 27.