beta
Text
1. The defendant's decision against the plaintiff is based on the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2009 Ghana1390698.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 24, 2009, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the claim of takeover amount against the Seoul Central District Court 2009 Ghana1390698, and on April 24, 2009, the judgment in paragraph (1) of this case (hereinafter “the judgment of this case”) was rendered by public notice and became final and conclusive.
B. The Plaintiff was granted immunity on October 21, 2014 in Busan District Court Decision 2013Da2799, 2013Hadan2799 Decided bankruptcy, and the said decision became final and conclusive around that time.
The defendant was not stated in the list of creditors submitted by the plaintiff to the above court.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above findings of the determination on the cause of the claim, the plaintiff was confirmed to have been granted immunity, and compulsory execution according to the judgment of this case should be denied.
B. The 1st head of the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff was aware of the existence of the obligation against the Defendant at the time of filing a petition for bankruptcy and immunity. As such, this constitutes “claim not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, and thus, should be excluded from the subject of immunity. 2) The term “claim not entered 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 the obligor was aware of the existence of the obligation against the bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, and thus, if the obligor was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above legal provision even if the obligor did not enter it in the list of creditors by negligence if he was aware of the existence of the obligation.