beta
Text
1. We affirm that the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability for indemnity on September 16, 2010 against the Defendant was discharged from liability.
2...
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 16, 2010, the Defendant concluded a credit guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff’s husband B with the guaranteed amount of KRW 47.5 million, Korea Bank for the guaranteed person, Korea Bank for the guaranteed person, and September 15, 2011, and the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the credit guarantee obligation of B.
B. B failed to repay the loans to the Bank, and on February 27, 2012, the Plaintiff subrogated for KRW 49,359,382 to the Bank in Korea, Inc., Ltd., and on June 23, 2015, the amount of subrogated payment of KRW 73,581,342 (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 49,359,382 (i.e., KRW 23,006,880 (the additional guarantee fee of KRW 873,610).
C. On October 11, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption with the Daegu District Court Decision 2012Hadan1078, 2012Ra1078, and the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on October 26, 2012. The Plaintiff did not enter the Defendant’s claim for reimbursement in the creditors’ list in the bankruptcy and exemption procedure.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings
2. “Claims not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to claims that an obligor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, but not entered in the list of creditors. Therefore, when the obligor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he/she was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim under the same Article even if the obligor was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation. However, if the obligor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the same Article even if he/she failed to enter it in
The reason why the claim not entered in the list of creditors is excluded from the list of creditors if it is not so.