beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s decision against the Plaintiff is based on the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2009Gais279256 Decided April 21, 2010.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The defendant (formerly: D) filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 2009 Ghana2792556, and the above court rendered a judgment on April 21, 2010 that "the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 15,674,365 won and 5,358,632 won with 20% interest per annum from September 3, 2009 to the date of full payment (hereinafter "the judgment of this case").
The instant judgment became final and conclusive as it is.
The Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with Seoul Rehabilitation Court No. 2017Hadan989, 2017Ma989, and was granted immunity on July 24, 2017 (hereinafter “instant immunity exemption”).
The decision to grant immunity in this case was finalized on August 8, 2017.
[Reasons for Recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the judgment of the court below as to the ground for a claim to determine the purport of the entire pleadings, barring any special circumstance, since the plaintiff's obligation to take over money against the defendant was exempted according to the decision of this case, compulsory execution based on the decision of this case shall be dismissed.
The defendant's assertion as to the defendant's assertion was that the plaintiff did not enter the obligation to the defendant in the creditor's list in bad faith during the bankruptcy and exemption procedure. Therefore, the defendant's claim for the amount of takeover constitutes non-exempt claim.
Judgment
"Claims that are not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith" under Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act means cases where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted and fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Thus, if the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of an obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above provisions of the Act, but if the debtor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it shall be recorded in the list