1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 12, 2008, the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant without setting the interest or the due date.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant credit”). B.

On September 2, 2011, the Defendant was declared bankrupt by the Daegu District Court 2010Ha7215, and the decision to grant immunity was finalized on September 20, 2011 upon receipt of the decision to grant immunity from the Daegu District Court 2010Hadan7215 on the same day.

(hereinafter “instant immunity”). Meanwhile, the list of creditors prepared and submitted by the Defendant while bankruptcy and immunity application was filed by the Defendant did not state the Plaintiff’s claim.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”) provides that “The debtor shall be deemed a bankruptcy claim in respect of any property claim arising before the declaration of bankruptcy,” and the main sentence of Article 566 of the same Act provides that “The exempted debtor shall be exempted from all liability for all obligations to the bankruptcy creditors except for dividends arising from the bankruptcy proceedings.” Thus, even if a bankruptcy claim is not entered in the list of creditors of the application for immunity, it shall be exempted from the effect of immunity unless it falls under any subparagraph of the proviso of Article 566 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da3353, May 13, 2010). In addition, the term “Immunity” in this context means that, although the debtor himself/herself continues to exist, he/she shall not be forced to perform the obligation against the bankruptcy debtor.

Therefore, when a decision to exempt a debtor from liability becomes final and conclusive, the right to file a lawsuit against the debtor would be lost (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da28173, Sept. 10, 2015). Meanwhile, the proviso to Article 566(3) of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act provides for “a claim for damages caused by a tort committed by the debtor intentionally” and the proviso thereto.