logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.08.27 2019나66222
양수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant, as the representative director, subscribed to the Bank’s credit card holders C (hereinafter “C”), approved that each provision under the Credit Card Member Terms and Conditions should be faithfully performed, and prepared and submitted an application for credit card subscription. The Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the above company’s credit card user obligation.

B. On May 29, 2009, the said company lost the benefit of time and discontinued its business as it did not pay the principal and interest, and on September 30, 201, the remaining principal of the said obligation is KRW 13,859,440.

C. The foregoing credit card obligations were assigned in sequence to the Plaintiff via D Limited Liability Company (the date of transfer September 30, 201), and E (the date of transfer July 31, 2015) (the date of transfer).

On July 11, 2012, the Defendant filed bankruptcy and application for immunity with the Seoul Central District Court on November 6, 2013, and received the adjudication of bankruptcy and the decision of permission for discharge (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Hau7146, Jul. 26, 2012; hereinafter “instant bankruptcy and exemption”), and the said decision became final and conclusive on November 23, 2013.

As above, the Defendant did not enter the instant loan claims in the creditors list while filing bankruptcy and application for immunity.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The defendant's assertion obtained a decision to grant immunity from the court, thus, the defendant's liability for the claim of this case arising prior to the above decision to grant immunity was exempted.

Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful because there is no benefit in protecting the rights.

B. 1) Determination is based on the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “ Debtor Rehabilitation Act”).

Article 423 shall constitute a bankruptcy claim against a debtor prior to the declaration of bankruptcy, and Article 566 shall constitute a bankruptcy claim, and Article 566 shall apply to the whole of the obligations owed to a bankruptcy creditor, except dividends pursuant to the bankruptcy procedures.

arrow