1. The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff is denied based on the Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2007Gaso57881.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the payment of the goods as Seoul Eastern District Court 2007 Ghana57881.

On October 16, 2007, the court rendered a favorable judgment of the defendant that "the plaintiff shall pay 16,747,893 won to the defendant and delay damages therefor" (hereinafter "the judgment of this case").

The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On November 29, 2017, based on the instant judgment, the Defendant issued a collection order for seizure and collection as to the claim for the return of deposit against the Plaintiff (third party obligor)’s bank (third party obligor) under the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch 2017TT 11521.

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Central District Court No. 2009Hadan1185, 2009, 11185.

On February 17, 2010, the court rendered a decision to grant immunity to the plaintiff, and on March 4, 2010, the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive.

At the time of filing an application for bankruptcy and exemption, the Plaintiff did not enter the Defendant’s claim (hereinafter “instant claim”) pursuant to the instant judgment in the list of creditors.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 3 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the instant claim constitutes a bankruptcy claim arising before the declaration of bankruptcy under Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”), and thus, according to the decision on immunity of this case, the Plaintiff was exempted from liability to repay the claim under the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case against the plaintiff by the defendant should be denied.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Since the Plaintiff’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion was aware of the existence of the instant claim and did not enter it in the list of creditors in bad faith, the instant claim constitutes non-exempt claim.

(b) the board 1.