1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On October 6, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Daejeon District Court Decision 2016Hadan1616, 2016Ma1611 and became final and conclusive on October 20, 2016.

B. Meanwhile, on June 2, 2014, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order against the Plaintiff under the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014 tea40801, and issued a payment order from the said court to pay the Plaintiff KRW 23,929,651 and delay damages for KRW 10,145,736 among them, which became final and conclusive on June 2, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant claim”). The Plaintiff omitted the instant claim in the list of creditors of the bankruptcy and exemption cases.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the effect of immunity extends to the instant claim that occurred prior to the final and conclusive decision of immunity, since it was merely omitted in the creditor list because the Plaintiff had an excessive debt at the time of filing an application for bankruptcy and immunity because of its excessive amount of debt at the time of filing the application.

The defendant asserts that the decision on immunity does not affect because the plaintiff's awareness of the claim in this case was omitted in bad faith.

B. Article 566 Subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that “a claim that is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith by an obligor” means a claim that is not entered in the list of creditors despite the obligor being aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted.

If a debtor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, even if he/she was negligent in not knowing the existence of an obligation, it does not constitute a non-exempt claim as prescribed in the above provision, but otherwise, if the debtor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim as prescribed in the above provision, even if he/she failed

set forth in the list of creditors.