beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 2006Ra869, and on February 3, 2006, the above court rendered a payment order with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 8,060,000 to the Defendant and its delayed payment damages” (hereinafter “instant payment order,” and the obligation based on the instant payment order was “the instant loan obligation”). The instant payment order was finalized on April 22, 2006.
B. On January 25, 2008, the Plaintiff was granted immunity on June 13, 2008 by the Seoul Rehabilitation Court Decision 2008Hadan2662 and 2008Ha262, which decided bankruptcy and application for immunity. The decision became final and conclusive on June 28, 2008. The list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff while applying for immunity does not state the instant loan obligations.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserted that, at the time of application for immunity, the Plaintiff did not intentionally state the instant loan obligations in the creditor list, and thus, the instant loan obligations were exempted, and that compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should not be denied.
In regard to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff did not enter the loan obligations of this case in the list of creditors with knowledge of intentionally at the time of application for immunity, and that the immunity decision on the loan obligations of this case does not have the effect of immunity.
B. Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Act on Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy (hereinafter “the Act”) provides that “a claim that is not recorded in the list of creditors in bad faith by an obligor” refers to a case where the obligor, despite being aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, failed to enter it in the list of creditors. Therefore, when the obligor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, he/she did not know thereof.