1. On April 14, 2017, Incheon District Court Decision 2017Da1032 decided April 14, 2017 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff.

1.The following facts of recognition do not conflict between the Parties:

On July 12, 2002, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the obligations of loans to Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd.

B. On May 20, 2016, the Defendant transferred the above joint and several liability claim against the Plaintiff from Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd., and applied for payment order against the Plaintiff on March 27, 2017 as the Incheon District Court Branch Kim Jong-si, 2017Hu1032. On April 14, 2017, the said court issued a payment order with the purport that “the Plaintiff would pay KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant” (hereinafter “instant payment order”), and the instant payment order was finalized on June 27, 2017.

C. The Plaintiff was declared bankrupt by the Incheon District Court 2014Hadan2392, 2014Ha2392, and 2014Ma2391, and was granted a decision of declaration of bankruptcy on October 14, 2014, and a decision of immunity on January 29, 2015, and the said decision of immunity became final and conclusive on February 13, 2015. At that time, the Plaintiff omitted entry of the claim for joint and several surety against the Plaintiff of Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. in the creditor list because he/she was unaware of the existence of the joint and several surety obligation against

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In other words, a claim on the property arising from a cause before the debtor is declared bankrupt, that is, a bankruptcy claim becomes final and conclusive, and even if such decision on immunity is not entered in the list of creditors at the time of application for immunity, unless it falls under the proviso thereof pursuant to Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, the liability ceases to exist, and the right to institute a lawsuit and the executive force of ordinary claims becomes natural obligations.

B. According to the above facts, the defendant's claim against the plaintiff under the payment order of this case constitutes a bankruptcy claim as a property claim arising from a cause arising before the bankruptcy is declared, and thus, the plaintiff was exempted from the defendant's obligation under the payment order of this case due to the confirmation of immunity from the plaintiff.

Therefore, this is applicable.