1. The Defendant’s decision on performance recommendation in the Incheon District Court Branch 2013Gabu29413 was based on the decision on performance recommendation in the case.

1.The following facts shall be considered not to be a dispute between the Parties:

A. On May 27, 2013, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the claim for embezzlement, etc. of public funds with the Incheon District Court Branch Branch Office 2013Gaso29413, and the said court issued a decision of performance recommendation on May 27, 2013 that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant KRW 4,252,240 and delay damages therefrom,” and the said decision became final and conclusive on June 12, 2013 on the ground that the Plaintiff did not object thereto.

(hereinafter “instant decision”). (b)

The Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Incheon District Court No. 2016Hadan2755, 2016Ma2754, and the said court rendered a decision to grant immunity to the Plaintiff on November 17, 2016, and the said decision was finalized on December 2, 2016.

However, the plaintiff did not enter the defendant in the list of creditors submitted at the time of bankruptcy and exemption.

C. Based on the instant decision, the Defendant received the order of seizure and collection as the District Court 2013TTT15869.

2. A claim on the property arising from a cause before the debtor is declared bankrupt, that is, a bankruptcy claim shall be exempt from the effect of immunity under Article 565 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, unless it falls under the proviso of Article 566 of the same Act, even if the decision to grant immunity on the bankrupt becomes final and conclusive and conclusive and is not entered on the list of creditors

According to the facts acknowledged above, the defendant's claim against the plaintiff in the decision of this case is a claim on property arising from a cause arising before the declaration of bankruptcy, which constitutes a bankruptcy claim, and the decision of immunity against the plaintiff is finalized and thus loses its executive force. Thus, barring any special circumstance, compulsory execution against the plaintiff in this case against the plaintiff cannot be permitted.

(A) In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the court below.