(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.02 2014가단188724

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.02 2014가단188724

대여금

Text

1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 52,00,000 and the interest rate thereon from November 22, 2014 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff lent to the Defendants, both married and married, KRW 10 million on May 6, 1996, KRW 38 million on March 19, 2003, and KRW 4 million on May 22, 2005, respectively. The Defendants decided to jointly and severally repay the above loans.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant loans”). (b)

Defendant B filed an application for each of the bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008Hadan15467 and 2008Ma15467 on May 16, 2008, and Defendant C filed an application for each of the bankruptcy and immunity with the same court Decision 2008Hadan15676 and 2008Ma15676 on May 19, 2008, and Defendant B obtained each immunity decision (hereinafter “each of the immunity decisions of this case”) on September 16, 2008 and became final and conclusive around that time.

C. However, at the time when the Defendants received a bankruptcy exemption decision, the instant loan claims were omitted in the creditor list.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the loan claim of this case was omitted from the creditor list at the time of the decision on immunity of this case, but the effect of each decision on immunity of this case extends to the loan claim of this case, barring any special circumstance.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment 1) asserts that the effect of immunity does not extend because the Defendants knew of the claim in this case and did not enter it in the creditor list. 2) The “claim that is not entered in the creditor list” under Article 566 Subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to a case where the obligor knew of the existence of the obligation against the bankruptcy creditors before immunity is granted, but fails to enter it in the creditor list. Thus, in a case where the obligor did not know of the existence of the obligation, even if he did not know of the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above provision even if he did not know of the existence of the obligation

참조조문

-채무자 회생 및 파산에 관한 법률 제566조

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.20 2018가단13279

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.04 2018가단29328

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.02.14 2018가단42260

-인천지방법원부천지원 2017.09.22 2017가단105922

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.06.04 2015가단2827