1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. D limited liability company filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order with the purport that the Plaintiff shall pay 19% interest per annum from October 13, 2010 to the date of full payment of the principal amount of KRW 24,705,47 and the principal amount of KRW 10,000,000 among them, for the payment order of KRW 24,70,47, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 19% per annum from October 13, 2010. The payment order of the above content was issued on October 21, 2010, and was finally

(Seoul Central District Court 2010 tea148342, hereinafter referred to as the "instant payment order"). (b)

On December 20, 2016, the Defendant acquired the bonds based on the payment order (hereinafter “instant bonds”) against the Plaintiff by means of the asset acquisition agreement between D Limited Liability Company and D Limited Liability Company.

C. Meanwhile, on September 14, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an application for immunity on personal bankruptcy and application for immunity (Seoul Rehabilitation Court Decision 2010Hadan15025, 2010, 15025, hereinafter “instant application for immunity”), and the said court received immunity on September 9, 201 from the said court.

However, the list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff in the instant case did not state the claim of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including provisional number), Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings, and significant facts to this court

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that at the time of the application for immunity in this case, the plaintiff did not recognize the existence of the claim based on the payment order in this case and did not enter it in the list of creditors in bad faith, and that the above claim should be exempted by immunity.

B. “Claims not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act refers to cases where an obligor is aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor prior to the decision to grant immunity and fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Therefore, when the obligor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, the obligor is negligent in not knowing the existence of an obligation