1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant B shall be dismissed.

2. Defendant A Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 89,584,137 and 46.

1. Loan on the date of maturity of loan under recognized facts, the maximum amount of loan extended, delay compensation rate, and 15% per annum on May 14, 2004; and

A. Defendant A entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Plaintiff as follows, and Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed the guarantee amount of KRW 338,000,000 for the said credit transaction.

Since then, Defendant A lost the benefit of time due to the delay of principal, Defendant A has the obligation to pay loans of KRW 42,782,700, total amount of KRW 89,584,137 as of April 5, 2015, including principal KRW 46,801,437 as of April 5, 2015, and delay damages.

B. Defendant B was granted immunity on November 8, 2013 by filing a petition for bankruptcy immunity with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Hadan5957, 2013Ma5957, and the decision became final and conclusive on November 26, 2013.

On the other hand, the list of creditors submitted at the time of application for immunity was not indicated in the list of creditors.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "any claim on the property arising before the declaration of bankruptcy against the debtor shall be a bankruptcy claim." The main text of Article 566 of the same Act provides that "the exempted debtor shall be exempted from all liability for all obligations to the bankruptcy creditors except dividends arising from the bankruptcy procedures." Thus, where a decision to grant immunity on the debtor becomes final and conclusive, the bankruptcy claim shall become a natural obligation and lose the ability and executory power of the lawsuit that has ordinary claims.

As seen earlier, Defendant B was granted immunity, and the Plaintiff’s claim for the instant loan became effective before immunity is granted. As such, the Plaintiff is entitled to file a suit against Defendant B based on the instant loan claim.