logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원마산지원 2019.01.24 2018가단105265
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was granted immunity on July 5, 2018 by filing a petition for bankruptcy and immunity with the Changwon District Court Decision 2018Hadan473, 2018Ma469, and the decision of immunity became final and conclusive around that time.

However, at the time when the Plaintiff filed the above bankruptcy and application for immunity, it was omitted in the list of creditors due to the Plaintiff’s failure to recognize the claim based on the payment order stated in the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant payment order”).

However, since the plaintiff did not neglect the claim of this case in bad faith, it has the effect of immunity against the claim of this case, and therefore compulsory execution against the plaintiff of this case shall be rejected.

2. Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, which provides for non-exempt claims, refers to a case where an obligor is aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted and fails to enter it 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 non-exempt claims as prescribed by the above provision, but 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 non-exempt claims as prescribed by the above provision, even if the obligor

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da49083 Decided October 14, 2010). Comprehensively taking into account the health care account of the foregoing case, the Plaintiff driven a vehicle without a license as of August 14, 2009 in the hospital parking lot and shocking the other vehicles going on the road while driving the vehicle at the hospital parking lot. Accordingly, C Co., Ltd shall compensate the victim of the traffic accident caused by the Plaintiff for personal and physical damage, and November 2009.

arrow