1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except where the defendant added a judgment on the assertion added by this court, and thus, it is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Additional determination

A. Prior to the completion of the extinctive prescription of the instant claim’s additional assertion by the Defendant, the Plaintiff approved the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant by means of entering the instant claim against the Plaintiff in the creditors’ list while making bankruptcy and application for immunity before the completion of the extinctive prescription of the instant claim. As such, the instant claim was interrupted due to the approval of the obligation pursuant to Article 168

B. According to the purport of each of the statements and arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), it is recognized that the decision of performance recommendation with respect to the claim of this case was confirmed as of April 4, 2007, the plaintiff, the debtor, filed a petition for bankruptcy with the Gwangju District Court 2010No. 822, Feb. 23, 2010, the application for immunity with respect to the claim of this case as of February 23, 2010, and the debtor filed a petition for bankruptcy with respect to 2010No. 823, the above court included the defendant in the list of creditors, and the fact that the court served the defendant with the period of filing an objection and the creditor guidance to the defendant in the

However, considering the following circumstances, it is difficult to view that the submission by the Plaintiff, as the debtor, of the instant claim, to the list of creditors, in the application for bankruptcy and application for immunity constitutes a debt approval.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion on a different premise is without merit.

(1) Approval as a ground for interruption of prescription shall be established by indicate that the debtor who is a party to the benefit of prescription loses his/her right due to the completion of prescription or his/her agent is aware of the existence of such right.

(Supreme Court Decision 95Da30178 Decided September 29, 1995). However, a debtor’s petition for bankruptcy and exemption is filed under the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”).