1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Facts of background;

A. On December 20, 2017, the Plaintiff received a claim attachment and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) against C’s remuneration claim (including retirement allowance payment; hereinafter the same shall apply) against the Defendant based on the executory exemplification of notarial deed No. 2003 No. 228, Dec. 20, 2017, based on the executory exemplification of notarial deed No. 2003, 2003 No. 118070, as a notary public against C (hereinafter “instant collection order”).

The original copy of the instant collection order was served on December 26, 2017 on the Defendant.

B. C was declared bankrupt on June 18, 2018 by Seoul Rehabilitation Court 2018Hadan1273, and the bankruptcy procedure was abolished on September 5, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination ex officio is made on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

If a bankruptcy is declared, any bankruptcy creditor may not exercise individual rights and obtain the satisfaction of his claim only by participating in the bankruptcy procedure (Article 424 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). Compulsory execution, provisional seizure or provisional disposition against the property belonging to the bankrupt estate based on any bankruptcy claim shall lose its effect against the bankrupt estate (the main sentence of Article 348(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). In addition, the discontinuation of bankruptcy is limited to the future effect of the declaration of bankruptcy and it does not have any retroactive effect. Thus, any compulsory execution, provisional seizure or provisional disposition invalidated by the declaration of bankruptcy shall not be restored

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da45995 delivered on October 12, 2006). The plaintiff claims the payment of the collection amount according to the collection order of this case by the lawsuit of this case. The execution claim of the collection order of this case constitutes a bankruptcy claim as a property claim arising before bankruptcy is declared against C, and the remuneration claim of C, which is a seized claim, belongs to the bankruptcy foundation.

Therefore, this case.