beta
Text
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
A. Within the limit of KRW 390,000,000, KRW 303,340,597 and KRW 275,691,124 among them.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the defendant's main defense of safety
A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the lawsuit of this case by the Plaintiff is unlawful and dismissed since the decision to grant immunity was rendered after having been declared bankrupt. The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff constitutes non-exempt claims, since the Defendant knew the existence of the claim of this case by the Plaintiff and did not enter it in the list of creditors in bad faith.
B. In full view of the absence of dispute between the parties to the judgment or the overall purport of the statement in the evidence in subparagraph 1 and the argument in subparagraph 1, the Defendant was declared bankrupt by the Daegu District Court Decision 2013Hadan5163, which was then decided to grant immunity by the Daegu District Court 2013Ma5163, August 5, 2014. The decision became final and conclusive around that time, and the Plaintiff’s claim in this case was not entered in the list of creditors.
“Claims not entered in the creditors’ list in bad faith” under Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act refers to claims that a debtor knows the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor prior to the decision on exemption, but not entered in the creditors’ list. Therefore, when the debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation, it does not constitute non-exempt claims under the aforementioned provisions even if he/she was negligent in not knowing the existence of the obligation. However, if the debtor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes non-exempt claims under the same Article even if he/she failed to enter it in the creditors’ list by negligence.
The reason why the claim not entered in the list of creditors is excluded from the list of creditors if it is not so, the creditors omitted in the list of creditors lose their claims without any opportunity to raise any objection, etc. to the application for immunity within the scope of the immunity procedure.