beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 3, 2014, the Plaintiff was sentenced to the Defendant to pay consolation money of KRW 10 million and delay damages therefrom in the Suwon District Court Decision 2014Ddan50133 (B), on the ground that he/she committed an unlawful act, such as having sexual intercourse with the Defendant’s spouse from around December 2, 2013, even though he/she was aware that the Defendant’s spouse C had a spouse, and caused mental pain to the Defendant.
B. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed as Suwon District Court 2015Reu18, but was dismissed on September 17, 2015, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 9, 2015.
C. Meanwhile, on January 28, 2015, the Plaintiff was declared bankrupt by the District Court 2014Hadan254, and the decision to grant immunity was rendered on June 11, 2015 and became final and conclusive around that time. The Defendant’s damage claim was not indicated in the list of creditors.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. On June 11, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s damage liability against the Defendant should be exempted, since the appellate court’s decision against the Defendant became final and conclusive only after the decision on immunity was rendered on June 11, 2015, the Defendant did not enter the Defendant’s damage liability in bad faith.
However, Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "a claim that is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith by an obligor" means a case where an obligor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted and fails to enter it in the list of creditors. As seen earlier, the first instance court rendered a decision to pay consolation money of KRW 10 million to the Defendant before a decision to grant immunity is made, and thus, the Plaintiff is aware of the existence of the obligation to compensate for damages against the Defendant before immunity is granted.