Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for confirmation of voting rights is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's rehabilitation debtor C Co., Ltd.

Basic Facts

A. On the date of continuing the instant lawsuit: November 20, 2019, which was served on C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) for the instant decision on performance recommendation.

B. On December 17, 2019, the rehabilitation procedure ( Daejeon District Court 2019 Ma5053, hereinafter “instant rehabilitation procedure”) commenced against C.

Defendant was appointed as C’s custodian.

C. The last day of the credit inspection period of the instant rehabilitation procedure is May 22, 2020.

On February 25, 2020, the Plaintiff reported the claim amount of KRW 21,142,550 to C in the rehabilitation procedure of this case. On May 22, 2020, the Defendant submitted a specification statement to the rehabilitation court and denied the Plaintiff’s claim.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 6, significant fact, purport of whole pleading

2. Since the amount of voting rights determined on a claim for confirmation of voting rights cannot be subject to a lawsuit for confirmation of rehabilitation claims (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da70903, Jul. 23, 2015), this part of the claim is unlawful.

3. Determination on claims for confirmation of rehabilitation claims

A. Whether a request for continuation was made in civil procedure should be determined on the basis of its substance.

(2) The Plaintiff submitted a request for continuation of proceedings on January 17, 2020, prior to the last day of the inspection period (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da113226, Nov. 27, 2014). However, it is reasonable to deem that a request for resumption of proceedings under Article 172 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act exists in substance, in light of the date of application for designation (the purport that, although a report on a claim was filed in the report procedure for filing a rehabilitation claim, C denies denies the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that it is under litigation, and thus, C denies the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that it is under litigation) and its attached documents (the purport that “the Defendant has the right to claim confirmation by denying the Plaintiff’s claim) and the application for modification of the cause of the claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da113226, Jun. 19, 2020).