beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On February 2, 2017, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017 tea1091, and issued a payment order stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 7,684,156 and the amount of KRW 2,39,79,93 at the rate of 15% per annum from February 16, 2017 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant payment order”), and the Defendant’s claim for the amount of KRW 7,684,156 became final and conclusive on March 3, 2017.
B. Upon receipt of the instant payment order, the Defendant: (a) filed an application with the Seoul Western District Court 2017TTT 3307 for the issuance of the instant payment order with the Plaintiff and the third debtor as the D, Inc., E, F Bank, and the Republic of Korea; and (b) received the decision of acceptance on April 11, 2017.
C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with Seoul Rehabilitation Court No. 2012Hadan2938 and 2012Ha2938, and on October 4, 2012, upon receipt of a decision to grant immunity (hereinafter “instant decision to grant immunity”) on October 23, 2012, the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on October 23, 2012, and the instant claim is not included in the list of creditors of the bankruptcy and exemption case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, and purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, barring any special circumstance, inasmuch as the debt of this case was exempted pursuant to the decision on immunity of this case, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall be dismissed.
B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff did not enter the claim in the list of creditors in bad faith with the knowledge of the existence of the claim in this case. Thus, the claim in this case constitutes non-exempt claim. 2) The claim in this case is a claim in which the Plaintiff, who was aware of the existence of the claim in this case, was not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith, under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act