1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

When any objection raised by any custodian, etc. as to the reported rehabilitation claim is lawful and any rehabilitation claim is not confirmed, the person holding the right to the rehabilitation claim may file an application for the final claim inspection judgment (Article 170(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act), in cases where a lawsuit on the disputed claim is pending at the time the rehabilitation procedures commence, all objectors shall take over the litigation procedures to seek the confirmation of their rights (Article 172(1) of the same Act), and the above lawsuit taking over shall be completed within one month from the last day of the inspection period.

(2) Articles 170(2) and 172(2) of the same Act. If a lawsuit is pending on rehabilitation claims at the time the rehabilitation procedure commenced, if a rehabilitation creditor raises an objection to the rehabilitation claim and the rehabilitation creditor claims confirmation of a right, and files an application for resumption after the lapse of one month from the end of the inspection period, the lawsuit is unlawful (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da52312, Feb. 11, 2000). On August 10, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the claim for the amount of KRW 195,540,069, and the delayed payment damages therefor, and the Defendant applied for the commencement of the rehabilitation procedure on November 13, 2018 as Seoul Rehabilitation Court Decision 2018Nu10246, Dec. 7, 2018.

As above, the Plaintiff did not request the Defendant’s administrator to resume the proceedings within one month from the end of the investigation period. As such, the instant lawsuit was unlawful.

Therefore, this case.