1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not.

Article 603(1) and (3) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that in cases where a creditor recorded in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors fails to file an application for a final judgment on an individual rehabilitation claim within the objection period or has been rejected, a claim is confirmed as stated in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors, and where any confirmed individual rehabilitation claim is entered in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors, such entry shall have the same effect as a final judgment on all of the individual rehabilitation creditors. Therefore, there is no benefit in a lawsuit to file

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the items of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 1 and 2 as to the instant case, it is recognized that the Defendant received a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures in the Seoul Central District Court case No. 2013da174945, Apr. 23, 2014; the record of the claim against the Defendant sought by the Plaintiff in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors; the confirmation of the list of individual rehabilitation creditors stating the Plaintiff’s claim and the decision to authorize the repayment plan was made.

In light of the above facts, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendant becomes final and conclusive and seek the performance of individual rehabilitation claims indicated in the table of individual rehabilitation creditors, and thus there is no benefit in the lawsuit.

On the other hand, the plaintiff asserts that the exemption against the defendant was not confirmed, but the same effect as the final judgment is recognized on the claims listed in the table of individual rehabilitation creditors, as seen earlier, and the effect of the exemption cannot be asserted in the lawsuit in this case.

2. In conclusion, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.