Jeonju District Court 2020 dated March 12, 2020 2019.38.

Litigation Costs are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 29, 2017, the Plaintiff issued an electronic bill number C, par value C, KRW 38,034,120, and maturity on March 20, 2018 (hereinafter “instant bill”).

B. Although the Defendant, who was the last possession of the Promissory Notes upon endorsement and assignment, proposed the payment within the time limit for presentment for payment of the Promissory Notes, the Defendant was refused on the ground of acceptance.

C. On March 29, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for rehabilitation with the Jeonju District Court 2018 Joint 4, and the said court rendered a decision to grant authorization of the rehabilitation plan on May 4, 2018 (hereinafter “instant rehabilitation procedure”), and on November 27, 2018.

The rehabilitation procedure of this case was completed on November 5, 2020. D.

As the Plaintiff omitted the Defendant’s claim in the instant rehabilitation procedure, the Defendant filed an application for confirmation of rehabilitation claim with the Jeonju District Court 2018Ma46 on November 15, 2018, and the said court rejected the said application on November 19, 2018 on the ground that “the Defendant is not indicated in the list in the instant rehabilitation procedure, but is not eligible to file an application for confirmation of claim because he/she did not make a report on the instant amount claim,” the said court rejected the application on November 19, 2018.

E. Accordingly, on November 26, 2018, the Defendant filed a subsequent report on the completion of the claim for the Promissory Notes with the rehabilitation claim. On January 22, 2019, the Defendant filed an application for the inspection of rehabilitation claims with the Jeonju District Court 2019. On October 14, 2019, the said court rejected the said application on the ground that “the said application, which was filed in advance prior to the special inspection date, was unlawful, on the grounds that the special inspection date to investigate the claim for the Promissory Notes reported to be supplemented after the drilling, was not set.”

F. At the special inspection date conducted on October 14, 2019 in the instant rehabilitation procedure, D, who was the Plaintiff’s administrator, submitted a subsequent completion statement to the effect that it denies the claim for the amount of the Promissory Notes, and made a statement to the same effect.

G. The defendant is therefore.