1. The Defendant’s payment order was the final and conclusive payment order against the Plaintiff at Seoul Central District Court 2014 tea 20189.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 16, 2002, the Plaintiff borrowed 1.1 million won at the interest rate of 60% per annum from Samsung Mutual Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Savings Bank”).

B. On September 8, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application for immunity for personal bankruptcy and immunity with the Daejeon District Court 2010do987 and 201Hadan987, and received a decision to grant immunity from the above court (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”), and on October 1, 201, the said decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive.

However, while filing the application for immunity in the instant case, the Plaintiff did not enter the above debts to the Samman Savings Bank (hereinafter “instant debts”) in the list of creditors.

C. On June 24, 2011, the Seoul Central District Court declared that the Samcheon Savings Bank was bankrupted on June 24, 201, and on the same day, the Defendant was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy of Samdae Savings Bank.

Meanwhile, on April 14, 2014, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 2014 tea20189, and issued a payment order to the effect that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant KRW 2,714,282 and damages for delay of KRW 1100,000 among them,” and the said payment order was served to the Plaintiff around that time.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "The exempted debtor shall be exempted from the responsibility for all of his obligations to the bankruptcy creditors except for the distribution under the bankruptcy procedure."

Therefore, according to the decision to grant immunity of this case, the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant was exempted.

I would like to say.

B. As to this, the Defendant did not enter the instant debt in the list of creditors when the Plaintiff filed the application for immunity, thereby deprived of the opportunity to file an objection to the application for immunity, etc., and the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant against the Defendant.