1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

In regard to the lawsuit of this case in which the plaintiff asserted by the parties concerned, on behalf of the defendant in order to preserve the claim for reimbursement against B (hereinafter "the claim of this case"), the defendant asserted that the lawsuit of this case in which the claim of this case is the preserved claim of this case is unlawful, since the defendant was granted decision of immunity by B.

Judgment

The obligee’s subrogation right should be premised on the fact that the obligee is entitled to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s right to exercise the obligee’s third obligor’s right in the obligee’

(see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da9412, Feb. 28, 2008). Meanwhile, the main text of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “ Debtor Rehabilitation Act”) provides that “The exempted debtor shall be exempted from all liability for all of his/her obligations to the bankruptcy creditors, except for the distribution under the bankruptcy procedure.”

(4) The Supreme Court Decision 2009Da13156 Decided June 23, 2009 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da13156, Jun. 23, 2009) held a creditor’s subrogation right with a bankruptcy claim as a preserved claim is not allowed, unless a dispute between the parties is not brought between them, entry of evidence No. 1 in the court, significant facts in this court, and the purport of the entire pleadings, comprehensively taking into account the following: (a) B’s bankruptcy and exemption application under the Daegu District Court Decision 2015Hau435, 2015, 2015, 2015, 4435, supra.