1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 13, 2001, medical corporations D (hereinafter “D”) borrowed KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff, and the Defendant, the head of D’s hospital, who was the head of D’s hospital, jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s debt against the Plaintiff of the said Foundation.

(B) The Plaintiff’s above claim against the Defendant (hereinafter “instant claim”).

Since then, the Plaintiff filed with D and the Defendant for a payment order stating that “The Defendant (D and the Defendant) jointly and severally served on the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50 million and the amount of KRW 11% per annum from October 13, 2007 to February 12, 2008, and the amount of 19% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The above court issued the same payment order on July 10, 2008. The above payment order was served on the Defendant on July 11, 2008 and became final and conclusive as is on July 26, 2008.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant declared bankrupt and applied for immunity by the Cheongju District Court No. 2015Hadan350, 2015Ma350, and was granted immunity on February 15, 2017, and the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive on March 3, 2017.

(hereinafter “instant decision on immunity”). However, the Defendant did not enter the instant claim in the list of creditors submitted at the time of the application for immunity.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The defendant had knowledge of the existence of the claim of this case at the time of the application for immunity, but omitted it in bad faith. The defendant is obligated to pay the principal and damages for delay of the claim of this case to the plaintiff who filed the lawsuit of this case for preventing the expiration of the statute of limitations. 2) The defendant's summary of the defendant's assertion was omitted because he did not know of the existence of the claim of this case at the time of application for immunity, and omitted it in bad faith.