1. Paragraph 1 of this Article applies to the judgment on the final judgment on an individual rehabilitation claim against Daejeon District Court on January 7, 2015, as follows.

Basic Facts

In the Daejeon District Court Decision 2006Gahap825, 2006Gahap8508 (Counterclaim), in the case of a claim for the sale price between the plaintiff, etc. and the defendant company, the decision was made on November 9, 2007 in lieu of conciliation, which included the purport that the plaintiff would pay the sale price to the defendant company, and the decision became final and conclusive around that time. 2) The claim for the sale price against the plaintiff of the defendant company against the plaintiff was total of KRW 109,196,00 as of August 16, 2013 (= Principal KRW 16,863,000, such as overdue interest of KRW 92,33,000).

On August 20, 2012, according to the commission between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B, Defendant B, as the husband of the Plaintiff. (2) On August 20, 2012, the authentic deed of a monetary loan agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B, stating that “Defendant B, on November 20, 2009, paid a maturity of KRW 73 million to the Plaintiff on August 25, 2012, and lent interest at 20% per annum” (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

Defendant B was granted an execution clause on September 12, 2012 with respect to the instant authentic deed.

(1) On August 30, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for commencement of individual rehabilitation procedures with Daejeon District Court 2013da42276 on August 30, 2013, and the said court decided to commence individual rehabilitation procedures with respect to the Plaintiff on January 8, 2014 (hereinafter “instant individual rehabilitation procedures”).

(2) At the end of the amendment of the creditor list in the individual rehabilitation procedure of this case several times, the Plaintiff stated in the creditor list that ① the debt 70 million won with respect to Defendant B on November 20, 2009, ② the debt 10 million won with respect to the borrowed money on February 2013, 2013, ③ the debt 10 million won with respect to the Defendant Company, ③ the debt 109,196,000 won with respect to the above parcelling-out payment (i.e., principal amount of KRW 92,33,000).

3. However, on March 17, 2014, the Defendant Company raised an objection against the content of the above list of individual rehabilitation creditors on the ground that there is no obligation of the Plaintiff against Defendant B and any obligation against Defendant C by Daejeon District Court 2014.