Whether the “amount of voting rights” among the matters entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors becomes subject to a lawsuit for confirmation of a rehabilitation claim (negative)

A lawsuit for the confirmation of rehabilitation claims is a lawsuit that provides for the confirmation of a right by determining the existence or details of a claim where a rehabilitation creditor raises an objection against a custodian, etc. with respect to a claim reported by the rehabilitation creditor. In light of the fact that a rehabilitation creditor, etc. can only claim only the matters entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors concerning the cause and details of the claim in the proceedings for the confirmation of rehabilitation claims, and that the amount of the voting rights out of the matters entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors are excluded from the subject matter (see, e.g., Articles 158, 173, and 174(3) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act), the

Articles 158, 170, 173, and 174(3) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act

Korean Asset Management Co., Ltd. (Law Firm LLC, Attorneys Seo-bong et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The administrator of a rehabilitation debtor, who is the taking-off of a lawsuit by a slinium Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Barun et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2013Na3035 decided August 22, 2013

The part of the judgment of the court below concerning the claim for confirmation of voting rights as to damages for delay of KRW 180,000 shall be reversed, and this part of the lawsuit shall be dismissed. The remaining appeals shall be dismissed. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne individually

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. A. A. A. The lawsuit seeking confirmation of a rehabilitation claim is a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of an objection against a claim reported by a rehabilitation creditor, etc., if there is an objection from the custodian, etc., and the right is determined by determining the existence of the claim or the details thereof. In light of the fact that a rehabilitation creditor, etc. may only claim the matters entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors concerning the cause and details of the objection in the litigation procedure for confirmation of the rehabilitation claim, and the amount of the voting right out of the matters entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors (see Articles 158, 173, and 174(3) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Bankruptcy Act”), the amount of voting right cannot be the subject of the lawsuit seeking confirmation

B. According to the records, while the court below was pending in the trial of this case, the rehabilitation procedure for the Capital Slovat Co., Ltd. was commenced, the plaintiff amended the purport of the claim as rehabilitation claim confirmation as to the amount of KRW 180,000,000 as well as the damages for delay thereof, and sought confirmation of the voting right to the amount of KRW 180,000 as 180,000.

According to the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s claim seeking confirmation of the voting right of KRW 180,000 for late payment damages is unlawful as it is not subject to the confirmation of rehabilitation claim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below, on the premise that this part of the claim by the plaintiff is lawful, went to the judgment on the merits, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the subject of the lawsuit for confirmation of rehabilitation claims under the Debtor Rehabilitation Act.

2. As to the Plaintiff’s other remaining claims, the Defendant’s petition of appeal and the appellate brief did not contain any descriptions of the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, the part of the judgment below on the claim for confirmation of the above damages for delay of KRW 180,000 among the judgment below is reversed, and this part is sufficient for this court to directly render a judgment. Accordingly, the plaintiff's lawsuit as to this part is dismissed, and the remaining appeals are dismissed, and the total costs of the lawsuit are borne by each party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Shin (Presiding Justice)