1. The Defendant’s decision on the loan case against the Plaintiff is based on Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2017 Ghana383179.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 2, 2017, C filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for a loan claim against the Seoul Southern District Court 2017Gaso383179, and this court rendered a judgment on August 23, 2017 that “the Plaintiff shall pay 6,989,328 won to C and damages for delay.” The judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter “the final judgment of this case”). In this litigation procedure, service by public notice was made to the Plaintiff.

B. On December 29, 2017, C transferred a claim based on the final judgment of the instant case to the Defendant.

C. On May 23, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a bankruptcy and application for immunity with Suwon District Court No. 2019Hadan1541, 2019, and 1541. On February 12, 2020 (hereinafter “instant immunity”) and became final and conclusive around that time, the Plaintiff did not enter C or Defendant’s claims in the creditors list at the time of bankruptcy and application for immunity.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that compulsory execution based on the final and conclusive judgment of this case should be denied, since the decision to grant immunity of this case became final and conclusive.

As to this, the defendant asserted that the decision of immunity in this case does not extend to the claim based on the final judgment of this case, since the plaintiff omitted the defendant's claim in bad faith with the knowledge of the defendant's claim at the time

B. As stated in Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, the term “claim which is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” means a case where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, and is not entered in the list of creditors. Thus, if the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, the above provision of the same Act shall apply