The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion is liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount stated in the purport of the claim, as it did not receive KRW 89,50,000,000, after the lease period expires, although the Plaintiff leased the Defendant’s “Ginhae C Apartment D” from the Defendant.

2. The main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that the obligor who has been exempted from the liability shall be exempted from the liability for all obligations to the bankruptcy creditors except dividends under the bankruptcy procedures.

The exemption here means that the obligation itself continues to exist, but it is not possible to enforce the performance to the bankrupt debtor.

Therefore, when a decision to grant immunity to a bankrupt debtor becomes final and conclusive, the claim exempted shall lose the ability to file a lawsuit having ordinary claims (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Da28173, Sept. 10, 2015). The Plaintiff filed a claim for the return of lease deposit against the Defendant in this case. However, according to the records, the Defendant filed an application for immunity with the Changwon District Court Decision 2017Hadan1653, Oct. 16, 2017 and 1647, and the Plaintiff’s claim for the return of the lease deposit in this case was entered in the creditor’s list, and the said court rendered a decision to exempt the Defendant on March 30, 2018, and the said decision becomes final and conclusive on April 14, 2018.

Therefore, the lawsuit in this case was unlawful because there was no benefit of protecting the rights due to the confirmation of the above immunity decision while the lawsuit is pending.

3. As such, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.