1. The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiffs by the Incheon District Court Decision 2006Gapo58127 is enforced based on the judgment of the claim amount case.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 207, 2007, the defendant filed against the plaintiffs in Incheon District Court Decision 2006Gapo 585127, "The plaintiff jointly and severally paid to the defendant 9,44,232 won and 5,098,834 won which are calculated by the rate of 18% per annum from December 19, 2006 to the day of full payment" (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"). The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On May 6, 2015, Plaintiff A was granted immunity in the Incheon District Court 2014:5566, and in the case of declaration of bankruptcy 2014Hadan5578, Plaintiff A was finally determined on May 21, 2015.

C. On April 29, 2015, Plaintiff B was granted immunity in the Incheon District Court 2014, 5568, and in the case of adjudication of bankruptcy 2014Hadan5580, and the said immunity became final and conclusive on May 14, 2015.

The plaintiffs did not enter claims based on the judgment of the defendant in the creditors list in the above bankruptcy and immunity procedure.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, a claim based on the judgment of this case is a bankruptcy claim arising due to a cause that occurred before the declaration of bankruptcy, and the effect of immunity on the plaintiffs pursuant to the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”), barring special circumstances, extends to a claim based on the judgment of this case.

The defendant asserts to the effect that "the plaintiff did not enter claims based on the judgment of this case in the creditor list in bad faith in the bankruptcy and immunity procedure," and that "the effect of immunity on the plaintiffs pursuant to Article 566 (7) of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act shall not extend to claims based on the judgment of this case."

However, the submitted evidence alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiffs did not enter claims based on the judgment of this case in the list of creditors in bad faith, and it is different.