beta
Text
1. The request is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On September 28, 2009, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she filed an application for bankruptcy or exemption with the Seoul Central District Court, and was declared bankrupt on March 6, 2012 and decided on June 19, 2012 upon the decision to grant immunity on June 19, 2012.
(209Haak25471, 2009, 25471). The Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant was omitted in the list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff did not have been maliciously omitted, and thus, the obligation to the Defendant was also exempted.
2. Determination
A. The debtor who has been exempted from liability under Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (Effect of Immunity) No. 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act shall be exempted from all of the obligations owed to the bankruptcy creditor, except for the distribution by bankruptcy proceedings.
However, the following claims shall not be exempted from liability:
7. Claim that is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith by the debtor. [Ban omitted] The term “claim that is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” refers to a case where the debtor, despite being aware of the existence of an obligation against the bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, is not entered 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 the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim even if the debtor was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, but if the debtor
Therefore, a creditor who is not recorded in the list of creditors is deprived of the opportunity to raise an objection, etc. to the application for immunity within the scope of the procedure for immunity, and accordingly, a creditor who is not recorded in the list of creditors is entitled to be deprived of the opportunity to file an objection, etc. to the application for immunity without any objective verification as to the grounds for non-permission of immunity stipulated in Article 564 of the Act, and accordingly, is entitled to be relieved of the debtor's responsibility to pay his/her obligations in principle. Therefore