The appeal by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional determination' as to the assertion that the plaintiff added or emphasized to the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. Although the Defendant asserts that the instant loan certificate was forged by the Defendant’s third village C, there is no dispute over the part of the Defendant’s stamp image of the instant loan certificate, the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established, and the data submitted by the Defendant alone are insufficient to recognize the fact that the instant loan certificate was forged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim based on the instant loan certificate constitutes non-exempt claim under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, since the Defendant knew of the existence of the obligation based on the instant loan certificate, but did not enter it in the list of creditors.

"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 refers to cases where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, but fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Thus, if a debtor knows the existence of an obligation, even if the debtor fails to enter it in the list of creditors by negligence, it constitutes non-exempt claims under the above Article.

On the other hand, the issue of whether a debtor's bad faith is a debtor's obligation shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the details of the omitted credit, the relationship between the creditor and the debtor, the relationship between the debtor and the debtor, and whether the debtor's explanation and objective data are consistent, and only the materials submitted by the debtor alone are not enough to deny