1. The defendant's decision of the Seoul Central District Court 2010Kadan302560 case against the plaintiff was made on January 6, 2011.

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the claim for reimbursement with Seoul Central District Court 2010Da302560, which was the Seoul Central District Court, and the decision of recommending reconciliation on January 6, 201 (hereinafter “decision of recommending reconciliation in this case”).

(2) On January 25, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption under the Incheon District Court Decision 2017Hadan3145, and 2017Ma3148 on July 20, 2017, and the said court declared bankrupt on October 17, 2017 and rendered a decision to grant immunity on September 19, 2018, and the said decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on October 5, 2018.

However, the plaintiff did not enter the defendant in the list of creditors submitted at the time of bankruptcy and exemption.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The right to property arising from the cause before the bankruptcy is declared against the debtor, that is, the bankruptcy claim, even if the decision to grant immunity on the bankrupt becomes final and conclusive, is not recorded on the list of creditors, unless it falls under the case of the proviso of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, is exempt from the effect of immunity under Article 565 of the same Act

According to the facts acknowledged earlier, the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff based on the decision on the recommendation for reconciliation of this case constitutes a bankruptcy claim as a property claim arising from the cause before the declaration of bankruptcy, and the decision on immunity against the Plaintiff has been finalized and thus has lost its executory power. Therefore, compulsory execution based on the Defendant’s decision on the recommendation for reconciliation of

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserts to the effect that the plaintiff's claim against the plaintiff constitutes non-exempt claim because the plaintiff was well aware of the existence of the claim based on the decision of recommending reconciliation in this case before the decision of immunity is granted.

B. The obligor under Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act does not enter in the list of creditors in bad faith.