1. The Plaintiff’s interest of KRW 2,206,00 against the Defendant and interest thereon from August 20, 209 to the day of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 10, 2002, the Defendant lent KRW 2,00,00,00 to the Plaintiff at the rate of 54% per annum on January 10, 2003, the due date for repayment, and the Plaintiff did not repay this. The Plaintiff filed a loan claim lawsuit with the Seoul Eastern District Court 2009 Ghana641655, and the above court’s “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 2,206,048 won and the amount at the rate of 20% per annum from the next day of delivery of the complaint to the day of full payment.” The above decision (hereinafter “instant decision”) was delivered to the Plaintiff’s mother on August 12, 2009, and the said decision (hereinafter “instant decision”).

9.3. Finality has been made.

B. On January 18, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption with the Daegu District Court Decision 201Hau322, 201Hau322,322, and received a ruling of bankruptcy and exemption from liability from liability from the said court on December 29, 2011, and the said ruling became final and conclusive on January 14, 2012.

C. The list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of applying for bankruptcy and exemption is omitted from claims based on the instant decision.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff's loan obligation based on the decision of this case was exempted because the decision of this case has not been effective after the decision of this case against the plaintiff. The defendant asserts that since the plaintiff did not enter the defendant's claim in the list of creditors in bad faith, the defendant's obligation against the defendant is not exempted.

B. (1) Determination is based on Article 566 Subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, which states that a debtor is aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, and thus, is not indicated in the list of creditors. Thus, if the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, he/she does not know of such existence.