beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay 50 million won to the plaintiff and 5% per annum from July 1, 2008 to October 27, 2016.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the defendant's main defense
A. The parties' assertion that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed since the defendant received a decision to grant immunity after being declared bankrupt, and the plaintiff asserts to the effect that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and that since the defendant knew the existence of the claim of this case and did not enter it in the list of creditors intentionally or in bad faith, the plaintiff's claim of this case constitutes non-exempt claims.
B. In full view of the respective entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Defendant was declared bankrupt by the Daegu District Court No. 2013Hadan3145, and subsequently, the Defendant was decided to be exempted by the Daegu District Court No. 2013, Dec. 30, 2013, and the decision became final and conclusive on January 14, 2014, and the Plaintiff’s claim of this case was not entered in the list of creditors.
“Claims that are not entered in the creditors’ list in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to claims that a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor prior to the decision of immunity, but are not entered in the creditors’ list. Thus, when 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 same Article even if the debtor was negligent in not knowing the existence of an obligation. However, if the debtor knew of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the same Article even if the debtor was negligent in failing to enter it in
The reason why the claim not entered in the list of creditors is excluded from the list of creditors is the opportunity for creditors omitted in the list of creditors to raise an objection to the application for immunity within the scope of the immunity procedure.