1. The Defendant’s decision against the Plaintiff is based on the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014 Ghana5203677 Decided April 24, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. As of January 18, 2019, the Plaintiff was decided bankrupt and exemption from liability as Seoul Rehabilitation Court No. 2018Hadan3373, 2018, and became final and conclusive around that time. The following claims of the Defendant were omitted from the list of creditors.

B. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff at the Seoul Central District Court 2014Gaso52036777, which was the end of the service by public notice (hereinafter “instant judgment”).

The credit card of C Co., Ltd. is the date of occurrence of the credit card in 2002.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. On the ground that the Plaintiff did not think that it would have been liable to the Defendant at the time of the bankruptcy and application for immunity in 2018, the Defendant directly signed by the Plaintiff and drafted a written application for C members joining, and that the decision of the attachment and collection order of the Busan District Court Branch Branch Decision 201TTTTT 201TTT 5377 reached August 11, 201, the Plaintiff was aware of the existence of the obligation.

In other words, a bankruptcy claim is not entered in the list of creditors at the time of application for immunity when immunity on the bankrupt becomes final and conclusive and conclusive against the debtor, unless it falls under the proviso of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, the right to file a lawsuit and the executive force of ordinary claims are exempted pursuant to Article 566 of the same Act, unless it falls under the proviso of Article 566 of the same Act.

Inasmuch as a decision to grant immunity to the plaintiff became final and conclusive, the claim of this case arising prior to the declaration of bankruptcy is void and compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case is not allowed unless there are special circumstances.

In full view of the purport of the whole argument in Gap evidence No. 6, the decision of the Incheon District Court Branch of the Incheon District Court of 2011TTT 5377 and the collection order, which the defendant asserted, did not directly receive by the plaintiff.