1. On January 23, 2013, the Plaintiff’s principal amounted to KRW 38,700,000 under a loan transaction agreement against the Defendant and interest thereon, etc.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 23, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a loan transaction agreement with the Korea Exchange Bank and received a loan of KRW 43 million (hereinafter “instant loan”); thereafter, the Plaintiff merged with the Korea Exchange Bank and the Defendant.

B. The Plaintiff filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Jung-gu Government District Court No. 2015 Session57848, and withdrawn the application, and the above court rendered a decision to permit the withdrawal on May 23, 2016. The list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff upon filing an application for individual rehabilitation included the loan claim in the list of creditors.

C. On December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff filed for bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Central District Court 2016Hadan3974, 2016 3974, and was granted immunity, and the said immunity became final and conclusive after the said immunity became final and conclusive.

However, the Plaintiff did not enter the instant loan claims in the list of creditors submitted while applying for bankruptcy or exemption.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant decision to grant immunity”) D.

As of March 7, 2017, the balance of principal of the loan claim of this case as of March 7, 2017 is KRW 38,700,00 and overdue interest is KRW 8,33,893.

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

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion did not enter the instant loan claims in the list of creditors when the Plaintiff applied for bankruptcy or exemption, the Plaintiff did not enter the instant loan claims in the list of creditors. However, as the Plaintiff did not know that the Plaintiff became the creditor of the instant loan claims upon the merger with the Defendant and did not enter the instant loan claims in the list of creditors, it should be deemed that the instant loan obligations were exempt from immunity.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Plaintiff filed an application for individual rehabilitation prior to the decision of exemption, but filed an application for bankruptcy or exemption, while filing an application for bankruptcy or exemption.