beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On September 13, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption with Suwon District Court 2012Hadan6968, 2012Ma6968 on September 13, 2012, and received a decision to declare and abolish a strike on May 14, 2013, and the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on August 27, 2013. The Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order against the Plaintiff seeking payment of KRW 5,00,63 of the principal and interest of KRW 5,400,63 and the principal and interest of KRW 3,403,130 on November 27, 2014, and the principal and interest of KRW 3,403,130 among them, or the facts established on March 3, 2015 are either disputed between the parties, or in accordance with the evidence evidence Nos. 1, 2, and No. 1.
2. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff prepared and submitted a list of creditors with knowledge that the defendant's debts are included in the list of creditors due to the cerebral surgery at the time of the application for bankruptcy and exemption from liability, and that the plaintiff's failure to enter the defendant's claims (the above DD bank's claims) in the list of creditors is by negligence and thus,
In regard to this, the defendant's above-mentioned claim is a claim that the plaintiff did not enter the creditor's list in bad faith, and thus, it is proved that it constitutes non-exempt claim.
3. Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to a case where an obligor is aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, and the obligor fails to enter the same in the list of creditors. Thus, if the obligor 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 same Act. However, if the obligor was aware of the existence of an obligation, even if he did not enter it in the list of creditors by negligence, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the same Act.
As such, the list of creditors shall not be entered.