1. The Defendant’s decision against the Plaintiff is based on the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012Gaso74641 Decided July 27, 2012.

1. In fact, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff and C with the Seoul Central District Court No. 2012Gaso746441, which was the result of the instant case’s proceeding by public notice, the said court rendered a judgment on July 27, 2012 that “the Plaintiff and C jointly and severally paid KRW 2,511,012 to the Defendant and the delay damages therefrom,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter “Related Lawsuit.” On June 3, 201, the Plaintiff filed a petition for adjudication of bankruptcy and exemption from liability with the Daejeon District Court Decision 2011:1751, 201Hadan1754, May 13, 2013. The Defendant’s final and conclusive payment claim (hereinafter “instant claim”) based on the obligee’s list was not stated in the relevant suit.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 2 through 5 evidence (including branch numbers in case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Any property claim arising prior to the declaration of bankruptcy against the debtor as to the judgment on the cause of the claim, that is, the bankruptcy claim shall be exempted from the effect of immunity under Article 565 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, unless it falls under the case of the proviso of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “ Debtor Rehabilitation Act”), even if the decision on immunity against the bankrupt becomes final and conclusive and conclusive, unless it falls under

According to the above facts of recognition, the instant claim is a property claim arising from a cause arising before the declaration of bankruptcy, which constitutes a bankruptcy claim, and the immunity decision against the plaintiff is finalized and thus loses its executive force, barring any special circumstance, compulsory execution based on the judgment of the defendant in the relevant lawsuit against the plaintiff shall not be permitted.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s argument 1 is that the Plaintiff did not enter the instant claim in the creditors’ list in bad faith in the aforementioned exemption case, and thus, the Defendant’s claim for the instant judgment constitutes non-exempt claim.