1. The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff is based on the judgment of the Gwangju District Court 2006Gapo293967.

1. Facts without dispute;

A. On March 20, 2007, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the payment of the acquisition amount of KRW 9,357,794 as the Gwangju District Court Decision 2006Gau293967, and was sentenced to a favorable judgment of the Defendant on March 20, 2007 (hereinafter “instant judgment”). The instant judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On December 15, 2011, the Plaintiff filed for bankruptcy and immunity with the Changwon District Court Decision 2010Hadan593, 2010Ma593, and was granted immunity from the said court (hereinafter “instant decision”), and the said decision became final and conclusive on December 30, 201 of the same year.

However, the list of creditors submitted by the plaintiff does not include the defendant's above-mentioned claim based on the judgment of this case.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case is not permissible since the immunity decision of this case became final and conclusive.

The defendant asserted that the decision of this case does not affect the decision of immunity of this case since the plaintiff intentionally omitted the defendant's claim upon knowing the defendant's claim at the time of the decision of this case.

B. Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act regarding the effect of decision on immunity refers to a case where an obligor is aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor prior to the decision on immunity and fails to enter it in the list of creditors. Thus, if the obligor 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 legal provision. However, if the obligor was aware of the existence of an obligation, even if he did not enter it in the list of creditors by negligence, even if he did not enter it in the list of creditors.