beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's decision of performance recommendation for the claim amount of the Incheon District Court 2004Gaso371508 against the defendant 13,268.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff as Incheon District Court 2004Gapo371508. On September 7, 2004, the above court decided that "the defendant (the plaintiff of this case) shall pay 13,268,290 won to the plaintiff (the defendant of this case) and 13,114,140 won among them, 18% per annum from July 30, 2003 to September 16, 2004, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment." The above decision on performance recommendation was served on the plaintiff on September 16, 2004, and confirmed on October 1, 2004.
B. The Plaintiff filed a petition for bankruptcy and immunity with the Incheon District Court as the head of Incheon District Court No. 2014Hadan1015, 2014Ra1013. The Plaintiff was granted immunity on June 16, 2014. The said decision became final and conclusive around that time, and the list of creditors omitted the Defendant’s claim.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "a claim on the property arising before the declaration of bankruptcy against a debtor shall be a bankruptcy claim," and the main text of Article 566 of the same Act provides that "a debtor who has been exempted from liability for all of his/her obligations to a bankruptcy creditor, except for dividends arising from bankruptcy procedures, shall be exempted from liability for all of his/her obligations." Thus, the plaintiff's obligation against the defendant constitutes a bankruptcy claim and is exempted from the exemption decision of this case.
B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant asserts that since the Plaintiff did not enter the instant obligation in the list of creditors in bad faith, exemption by the instant decision of exemption under Article 566 Subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act is limited. 2) However, in the proviso to Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, the liability for the following claims is not exempted: