1. The Plaintiff’s loan of 8,530,000 won to the Defendant and interest thereon and delay damages.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 30, 2001, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 12,000,000 from the Defendant for the purchase of Bone Star Vehicles (hereinafter “instant loan”), and sold the said vehicle to C around June 2001.

B. On August 24, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a petition for adjudication of bankruptcy and exemption from liability with the Seoul Rehabilitation Court (Seoul Rehabilitation Court Decision 2012Hadan8673, 2012Ma8673, and the decision became final and conclusive upon January 17, 2013. The Defendant and the instant loan claims were not stated in the list of creditors.

C. On November 19, 2015, the Plaintiff requested the future Credit Information Company to collect the instant loan claims, and notified the said Company to pay KRW 41,159,032 to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 8,530,000, interest and fees in arrears, and KRW 32,629,032.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The obligor for whom a decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive is exempt from all obligations owed to bankruptcy creditors except dividends under bankruptcy proceedings (the main text of Article 565 and Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act). Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the principal and interest obligation of the instant loan was also exempted.

The defendant asserts to the effect that since the plaintiff intentionally omitted the existence of the loan debt of this case at the time of declaration of bankruptcy and application for exemption, the above debt does not be exempted.

"Claims that are not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith by an obligor" under Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act means cases where an obligor is aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, but is not entered in the list of creditors.

Therefore, when a 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 a non-exempt claim under the above provision.