1. The principal amounting to KRW 9,600,000 under a monetary loan contract on February 24, 2001 against the Plaintiff and interest accrued therefrom.

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. On February 24, 2001, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 17,000,000 from the Defendant at interest rate of 48% per annum. 2) The Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Gwangju District Court 2013Hadan2630 (2014 2630), and was declared bankrupt on December 20, 201, and was granted immunity exemption on February 14, 201, and the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on March 1, 2014.

3) At the time of the application for bankruptcy and exemption, the Plaintiff did not enter the Defendant’s above loan claims against the Plaintiff in the list of creditors. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport

B. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Plaintiff’s obligation to borrow loans against the Defendant was exempted.

2. Defendant’s assertion and judgment thereon

A. The Defendant’s assertion knew of the Defendant’s obligation to the Defendant at the time of filing an application for bankruptcy and exemption, but omitted in the list of creditors in bad faith.

B. Determination 1) Article 566 Subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act refers to a case where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor prior to the decision to grant immunity, and where the debtor fails to enter the same in the list of creditors. Thus, if the debtor 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 above provision, but if the debtor knew of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the above provision of the same Act even if he did not enter it in the list of creditors by negligence (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da49083, Oct. 14, 2010). The debtor’s burden of proof on the debtor’s bad faith lies in a person who asserts it. 2) The evidence submitted by the defendant alone is known that the Plaintiff had an obligation against the defendant prior to the decision to grant immunity.