1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From April 6, 2009 to June 6, 2011, the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 124,000,000 to the Defendant several times during a period from April 6, 2009 to June 6, 201.

B. On June 3, 2013, the Defendant entered the Plaintiff’s above loan claims in the list of creditors, and was granted a decision to grant bankruptcy immunity by Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012Hadan7502, 2012Ha7502, and the said decision became final and conclusive on June 25, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The main text of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that an obligor who has obtained immunity shall be exempted from all obligations owed to any bankruptcy creditor, 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 debtor in bankruptcy becomes final and conclusive, the claim exempted shall lose the ability to file a lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da28173, Sept. 10, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, as recognized earlier, the Defendant was entitled to the exemption from bankruptcy by entering the Plaintiff’s loan claims in the list of creditors, and it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff lost the ability to file a lawsuit against the Defendant regarding the instant loan claims.

3. According to the conclusion, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights.