1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 25, 2011, Solomon Savings Bank (hereinafter “ Solomon Savings Bank”) (hereinafter “ Solomon Savings Bank”) designated and lent KRW 3,000,000 as interest rate of 32% per annum, 39% per annum, and 36 months per annum to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)

The Solomon Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on April 30, 2013 by Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap46, and the defendant was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy.

C. As of June 16, 2014, the principal and interest of the instant loan claims are KRW 5,191,124 (i.e., the balance of loans KRW 2,788,035 + an attempted interest + KRW 2,403,089).

On May 2012, the Plaintiff was declared bankrupt by filing an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Central District Court No. 2012Hadan5364, 2012Ra5364, and the decision to grant immunity on April 9, 2013 (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”), and the said decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on April 24, 2013.

The list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff while filing an application for bankruptcy and immunity did not indicate the claim of the loan of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was made by setting up a list of creditors without knowing the existence of the claim for the instant loan because the Plaintiff had an obligation to be borne at the time of filing an application for bankruptcy and exemption from liability is too much.

Therefore, since the Plaintiff did not intentionally omit the entry of the obligation of the instant loan in the creditor list, the obligation of the instant loan should be deemed as exempted.

B. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: (a) the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance (Articles 5 and 13, 4, 5, 5, and 13, 420 of the judgment of the court of first instance) is the same, except for the case where “this case 2 claims” are deemed to be “claim of this case” as “claim of this case”; and

3. Conclusion.