The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The facts that there is no dispute, and comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the non-party F Co., Ltd., operated by the plaintiff's husband E, was loaned KRW 170 million from the defendant on October 6, 2011, and the plaintiff joint and several surety debt of this case (hereinafter "joint and several surety debt of this case"), upon the plaintiff's application, and upon the defendant's application, the plaintiff's joint and several surety debt of this case, "the plaintiff shall pay damages for delay at the rate of KRW 24,59,681, and 10,557,701 from September 18, 2018 to the date of full payment, whichever is 13.5% per annum, from September 20, 2018 to the date of full payment, the Seoul Southern District Court ordered payment order No. 154014 on Sep. 20, 2018 to the creditor's immunity order of this case of this case.

2. The plaintiff asserts that, as the cause of the claim in this case, the plaintiff did not enter the joint and several debt obligations of this case in the list of creditors of this case merely as actual number of creditors, but does not have an intention to harm the creditor. Thus, the joint and several debt of this case is also exempted.

However, Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to a case where an obligor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, but fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Thus, if the obligor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the above provision, but if the obligor was aware of the existence of an obligation, even if he did not enter it in the list of creditors by negligence, it is prescribed under the above provision of the Act.