logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.11.03 2016가단15580
면책확인
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Daewoo Investment Co., Ltd. filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order with the Seoul Eastern District Court 2012 tea8604, and the said payment order was served on the Plaintiff’s spouse on September 3, 2012 and became final and conclusive around that time.

B. Around February 25, 2013, Daewoo Investment Co., Ltd. transferred the above claim against the Plaintiff to the Defendant and notified the Plaintiff.

C. On April 30, 2010, the Plaintiff was declared bankrupt by Seoul Central District Court Decision 2009Hadan26249, and was granted immunity as 26249 on September 8, 2010 by the above court.

The plaintiff did not enter his claim under the above payment order in the list of creditors at the time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 3 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the effect of the above decision to grant immunity extends to the defendant's claims, since the plaintiff prepared a list of creditors at the time of filing an application for bankruptcy and exemption and omitted the defendant's claims.

Since the plaintiff seeks confirmation of exemption while the claim under the above payment order was exempted, it is considered ex officio as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights. The benefit of confirmation is recognized in cases where there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and thereby, it is recognized in cases where receiving a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate such apprehension or risk when the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status is unstable or dangerous (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da218511, Dec. 11, 2014). However, the payment order for the obligation for which the Plaintiff is seeking confirmation of exemption has become final and conclusive and the Defendant is able to enforce compulsory execution with the payment order. Thus, the judgment of confirmation of exemption alone cannot be ruled out. Thus, in order to eliminate the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status and risks.

arrow