1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s lawsuit against the defendant B shall be dismissed;

2. Defendant C shall be KRW 15,000,000 to Appointers D.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 30, 2012, the Defendants drafted a loan certificate (Evidence 1; hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”) stating that “The Defendants borrowed KRW 22,605,000 from the Appointed and KRW 2,605,000 from the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) on June 30, 2012, and borrowed KRW 22,605,000 from the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) on June 30, 2012, and the interest shall be KRW 452,00 per month until the date of full payment.”

B. Defendant B repaid KRW 5,00,000 to the Appointor D on January 15, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. In other words, a claim on property arising from a cause before the debtor is declared bankrupt, that is, a bankruptcy claim, becomes final and conclusive pursuant to the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, and a decision to grant immunity on the debtor under the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, all of the responsibilities are extinguished, and the right to file a lawsuit

According to the written evidence No. 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings, Defendant B, on August 30, 2016, filed a petition for bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Rehabilitation Court 2016Hadan6390, 2016Ma6390, and filed a petition for adjudication of bankruptcy and exemption from immunity. On November 16, 2017, the exemption from immunity was granted and confirmed at that time, and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) included in the list of creditors submitted by Defendant B in the above bankruptcy and exemption case.

According to the above facts of recognition, even if the loan claims for which the plaintiff (appointed party) sought payment against the defendant B by the lawsuit in this case are recognized as the existence of such loan claims, the plaintiff lost the ability and executive capacity of filing a lawsuit with ordinary claims according to the confirmation of the above decision to grant immunity.

Therefore, the lawsuit against the defendant B by the plaintiff (appointed party) is unlawful as there is no benefit of protection of rights.

3. The instant case, which is a disposal document, as evidence of the loan claims against Defendant C in determining the claim against Defendant C.