1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. Basic facts

A. In order to secure damages and losses to be incurred by the Plaintiff due to the Plaintiff’s illegal act when the Plaintiff was employed in the non-party manufacturing company, a contract for the guarantee of identity made between the Defendant and the Defendant during the period of insurance coverage from September 28, 2001 to September 27, 2004 was concluded.

Since then, the plaintiff suffered property damage due to the occurrence of the plaintiff's failure food manufacturing company, which has claimed insurance money under the above contract for fidelity guarantee. Accordingly, the defendant paid 30,000,000 won to the neglected food manufacturing company.

B. The defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for the claim for reimbursement amount of Seoul Central District Court 2008Kadan118823, and on June 17, 2008, the judgment of June 2008 that "the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 30,000,000 won with 5% interest per annum from March 13, 2008 to April 14, 2008 and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the date of full payment."

C. The Plaintiff’s decision became final and conclusive on March 10, 2009, which became final and conclusive on March 26, 2009, in the Gi Government District Court Decision 2008Hadan5313 decided on September 2008, the 2008Hadan5313 decided on March 26, 2009.

However, the list of creditors prepared in the above case does not state the plaintiff's obligation of indemnity against the defendant.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 7, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion did not know the defendant's obligation at the time of the application for bankruptcy and exemption, and the above decision of exemption effect also extends to the defendant's above claim.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff filed a petition for bankruptcy and exemption is exempt from immunity because the Plaintiff knew of the existence of the Defendant’s claim and did not enter it in the list of creditors and received immunity.

3. We examine ex officio the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.