1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The grounds for the Plaintiff’s claim are as shown in the annexed sheet.

2. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

According to the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “ Debtor Rehabilitation Act”), any property claim that occurred prior to the commencement of rehabilitation procedures against a debtor falls under a rehabilitation claim (Article 118); any rehabilitation creditor who intends to participate in rehabilitation procedures shall report his/her rehabilitation claim to the court within the reporting period set by the court (Article 148); any custodian shall prepare and submit a list of rehabilitation creditors separately from the report of the rehabilitation creditor (Article 147); and any rehabilitation creditor’s claim recorded in the list shall be deemed reported to the court (Article 151); and when the rehabilitation plan is decided to authorize the rehabilitation plan, the debtor shall be exempted from liability for all rehabilitation claims except for the rights recognized under the rehabilitation plan or the Debtor Rehabilitation Act (Article 251). Accordingly, the right that is not reported during the rehabilitation procedure or entered in the list of rehabilitation creditors would be forfeited; even if forfeited rehabilitation claims are completed thereafter, the lawsuit seeking the implementation of forfeited rehabilitation claims or the confirmation of forfeited rehabilitation claims is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

On June 17, 2016, the decision to commence rehabilitation procedures against the defendant was rendered, and the plaintiff did not report the claim of this case that occurred before the decision to commence rehabilitation procedures as rehabilitation claims, and did not enter the claim in the list of rehabilitation creditors, and on June 17, 2016, the fact that the decision to commence rehabilitation plans against the defendant was issued on June 17, 2016 is not a dispute between the parties, and thus, according to the above legal principles, the claim of this case arising from the cause before the commencement of rehabilitation procedures against the defendant was forfeited.

Therefore, forfeited.