1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff is denied based on the payment order issued by the Seoul Eastern District Court 201Hu41593.

1. If Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 states the purport of the entire pleadings in determining the facts of recognition and the cause of claim, the defendant received a payment order (this court's order 41593; hereinafter "the instant order") from the above court on December 12, 201, stating that "the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 39,952,652 won and 13,766,473 won, calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from November 21, 2011 to the day of complete payment," and thereafter, the plaintiff may receive a payment order (this court's order 201Da41593; hereinafter "the instant order"), and the fact that the plaintiff filed bankruptcy and application for immunity with the Daegu District Court on December 19, 2017, and received immunity from each court on September 7, 2018.

According to the above facts, inasmuch as the defendant's above payment order claim against the plaintiff was exempted from the above immunity decision, compulsory execution based on the above payment order cannot be permitted unless there are special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff did not enter the defendant's claim in the list of creditors in bad faith, and thus, the defendant did not grant immunity pursuant to Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter "the Debtor Rehabilitation Act").

B. According to Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, “a claim which is not entered in the creditors’ list in bad faith” refers to a case where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, but is not entered in the creditors’ list. Thus, if the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not aware of the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above provision, but if the debtor knew of the existence of an obligation, he did not enter it in the creditors’ list by negligence.