beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts [Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 8, and 11; the purport of the whole pleadings was to file a lawsuit against the plaintiff against the plaintiff for the performance of the obligation of indemnity amount under the Suwon-si Branch of Suwon-si, 2007Gadan47698. The above court rendered a judgment ordering the payment of the money as stated in attached Table 3 on May 28, 2008 on the same ground as stated in attached Table 3 (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant's claim under the above judgment") and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
① On July 18, 2005, the Plaintiff filed a petition for bankruptcy with the Suwon District Court Decision 2005Hadan1904 decided October 18, 2007.
② On October 24, 2007, the Plaintiff filed an application for immunity under the Suwon District Court Act (13417), which became final and conclusive on May 27, 2010. The decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on June 11, 2010.
(3) The Plaintiff did not report the instant claim in the above immunity procedure, and accordingly, did not enter the instant claim in the list of creditors.
Based on the judgment stated in paragraph (1), the Defendant received the claim attachment and collection order from the Suwon District Court Support 2017TTTT 20122 on September 25, 2017, and served the Plaintiff’s spouse G on the basis of the judgment stated in paragraph (1).
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's summary of the claim: The plaintiff's exemption effect on the above claim, unless the plaintiff has maliciously omitted the claim of this case at the time of the application for immunity.
The defendant has an obligation to pay the plaintiff's wage obligation according to customary practice, and the contents of the decision of 2007Gadan4769 claimed by the defendant are unfair amounts.
Defendant: (a) The Plaintiff did not liquidate the wages, etc. even after receiving the construction payment from the Defendant; and (b) on June 10, 2006, the Plaintiff suspended the construction work in return for promising the liquidation of overdue wages, etc.
The plaintiff is malicious.