beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's action against the defendant A shall be dismissed.
2. Defendant B’s KRW 78,526,362 and KRW 78,526,301 among the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. We examine, ex officio, the determination of the lawsuit against Defendant A on the lawfulness of the lawsuit against Defendant A.
According to Article 603(1), (3), and (4) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, where a creditor who has been recorded in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors fails to file an application for a final judgment on a final judgment on a final judgment on a final judgment on a final judgment on a final judgment on a final judgment on a rehabilitation creditor or is dismissed within the objection period, a claim is confirmed according to the list of individual rehabilitation creditors, and where a final judgment on a final judgment on a final judgment is entered in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors, the entry
According to the above provisions, if the period for objection against the claims listed in the table of individual rehabilitation creditors exceeds the period for objection, a creditor shall be deemed to have the same effect as the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the debtor on the amount of the claim. If the individual rehabilitation procedures continue, regardless of whether the repayment plan is authorized or not, the individual rehabilitation creditor may be repaid according to the repayment plan authorized in the individual rehabilitation procedures, and even if the individual rehabilitation procedures are discontinued, compulsory execution may be effected
Therefore, the creditor has no interest in filing a separate performance suit against the debtor for the same claim.
In this case, Defendant A filed an application for individual rehabilitation with Suwon District Court 2017Da62802, and was decided to commence individual rehabilitation on March 12, 2018, and the above Defendant stated the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors, and the Plaintiff did not raise any objection within the objection period ( May 15, 2018), the fact that the claim for indemnity of this case was confirmed as stated in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors.