1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff was based on the Seoul Western District Court 2015Hu62050 claim.

1. A claim on property arising from a cause before the declaration of bankruptcy against a debtor is a bankruptcy claim (Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). A debtor who has been exempted from liability is exempt from all liability for all debts to the bankruptcy creditor except dividends under the bankruptcy procedure (main sentence of Article 566 of the same Act). In full view of the overall purport of arguments in the entries in Gap 1 through 4, Eul 1 through 3, the plaintiff was declared bankrupt with the Incheon District Court Decision 2013Hau4720, March 31, 2014, Incheon District Court Decision 2013Ma4716, the above immunity decision became final and conclusive on April 15, 2014. The defendant's claim on the payment order stated in the order of the payment against the plaintiff (hereinafter "the claim in this case") was determined as a joint and several surety obligation of the non-party 206, the amount of the non-party 1 and the non-party 3606, the non-party 20616.

I know that the defendant was transferred after the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive.

In light of the above facts in light of the above legal principles, although the defendant's claim in this case continues to exist in itself, it cannot compel the plaintiff, who is the debtor of bankruptcy, to perform his/her obligations, so Supreme Court Decision 2015Da28173 Decided September 10, 2015, and compulsory execution based on the payment order stated by the defendant's order against the plaintiff should be rejected.

2. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant did not enter the non-party company's claims in the list of creditors at the time of the above declaration of bankruptcy and exemption, although the plaintiff knew of the existence of the joint and several surety obligation against the non-party company.