1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff on June 13, 2013, based on a judgment of 2013 Ghana5302, is denied.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. In fact, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the purchase price as the court No. 2013 Ghana5302.

On June 13, 2013, this Court rendered a judgment that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 4,069,020 won and interest thereon at a rate of 6% per annum from May 21, 2011 to May 22, 2013, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”).

The instant judgment became final and conclusive.

The Plaintiff did not enter the Defendant’s claim pursuant to the instant judgment in the list of creditors submitted to the above court upon filing an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Central District Court No. 2015Hadan6975, 2015, 6975.

On May 31, 2016, the Plaintiff received a decision to grant immunity from the Seoul Central District Court. The said decision became final and conclusive on June 15, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant decision on immunity”). [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1 through 6 (including additional numbers), the purport of the entire pleadings.

B. Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “ Debtor Rehabilitation Act”) provides that “The debtor shall be entitled to a bankruptcy claim against the property claim arising prior to the declaration of bankruptcy, and Article 566 of the same Act provides that “The debtor granted immunity shall be exempt from all obligations to the bankruptcy creditors except dividends under the bankruptcy procedures: Provided, That no liability shall be exempted for the following claims.” Thus, even if a bankruptcy claim is not entered in the list of creditors of the application for immunity, it shall be exempted from the effect of immunity unless it falls under any subparagraph of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da3353, May 13, 2010), barring any circumstance provided for in the proviso to Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, the defendant’s claim shall be a bankruptcy claim: