The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 67,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 27, 2019 to August 11, 2020, and thereafter.

1. The Plaintiff, on October 1, 2009, lent a loan of KRW 67 million to the Defendant on October 1, 2009, has no dispute between the parties. Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the loan obligation of KRW 67 million and its delay damages, barring any special circumstance.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant's gist of defense was declared bankrupt and immunity was granted by the Daegu District Court. Since the plaintiff did not know the existence of the loan claim of this case against the defendant and did not enter in the creditor list at the time of filing a petition for bankruptcy, the defendant's liability is exempted

B. “Claims that are not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to cases where a debtor, despite being aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor prior to the decision of immunity, failed to enter it in the list of creditors. Thus, when the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above provision, but if the debtor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the above provision of the Act even if the debtor was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation. However, if

The grounds for excluding claims not entered in the list of creditors are as follows. If there are creditors not entered in the list of creditors, the creditors are deprived of the opportunity to file an objection, etc. to the application for immunity within the scope of the immunity procedure, and accordingly, the exemption is permitted and confirmed without any objective verification as to the grounds for non-permission of the immunity stipulated in Article 564 of the above Act, and thus, the obligor goes beyond the responsibility for the repayment of obligations in principle. Thus, the opportunity to participate in the above procedure.