logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.23 2020가단5057673
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On November 15, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption with the Daejeon District Court, and the decision became final and conclusive around that time.

However, the list of creditors submitted by the plaintiff in the above bankruptcy procedure did not state the obligations arising from the payment order stated in the claims that the plaintiff had borne against the defendant.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy

2. According to the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act as to the cause of the claim, a debtor who has been exempted from liability is exempted from liability for all debts to a bankruptcy creditor except dividends pursuant to the bankruptcy procedure. The obligation pursuant to the instant payment order constitutes a bankruptcy claim, which is a property claim arising before the plaintiff's bankruptcy is declared, and constitutes a bankruptcy claim. Thus, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, the plaintiff's above obligation against the defendant is exempted, and thus, compulsory execution against the plaintiff based on the instant payment order should be rejected.

3. The defendant's defense asserts that since the plaintiff did not enter each of the obligations of this case in the creditor list in bad faith, each of the above obligations constitutes non-exempt claims under Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act.

Therefore, “Claims that are not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act refers to cases where a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, but fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Therefore, even if a debtor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes non-exempt claims under the same Act, even if the debtor did not enter it in the list of creditors by negligence.

Whether or not the obligor's bad faith is an obligor with respect to the details of omitted claims, the relationship between the obligee and the obligor, the relationship between the obligor and the obligor, and the circumstances of the omission.

arrow