1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff received a credit card from the Japanese bank around 2000 and borrowed a loan from the Seoul Bank.

The Korea Asset Management Corporation that received these bonds was awarded a favorable judgment by filing a lawsuit against the plaintiff in Seoul Central District Court 2004Gaso2116966 and Seoul Northern District Court 2005Gaso6743.

B. Since then, the Defendant, who acquired the claim against the Plaintiff from the Korea Asset Management Corporation, applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 2015 tea3658, and the said payment order was finalized on October 3, 2010.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court No. 2008Da1975 and was granted immunity on August 18, 2008, and became final and conclusive around that time.

However, the plaintiff did not enter the claim of Korea Asset Management Corporation in the list of creditors at the time of bankruptcy or exemption.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was omitted in the list of creditors, because the lawsuit filed by the Korea Asset Management Corporation against the Plaintiff was served by public notice, and the Plaintiff did not have omitted in the list of creditors in bad faith.

Therefore, the effect of immunity decision extends to the claim for grant.

B. According to the evidence No. 1-1-5 of No. 1-5 of the judgment, the fact that the notice of assignment of claims was sent to the defendant by content-certified mail can be acknowledged. In the absence of special circumstances, if the content-certified mail was not sent and returned, it shall be deemed that the notice was served at

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da38322 delivered on February 25, 1997). As long as the Plaintiff was aware of the existence of an obligation, the Plaintiff did not enter the list in the list of creditors by negligence.

Even if it does not grant immunity, the plaintiff shall consult with the Korea Asset Management Corporation on January 21, 2005 about the debt adjustment.