logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.12 2015가단128347
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the claim for the takeover amount (Seoul Central District Court 2008Gaso305348), and the said lawsuit was served by public notice against the Plaintiff.

On April 23, 2009, the above court rendered a ruling that "the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 13,319,901 won and 7,205,517 won among them at the rate of 20% per annum from July 31, 2008 to the date of full payment," and the above ruling was finalized on May 14, 2009.

(hereinafter referred to as the above, the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “instant claim for acquisition by transfer”). B.

On November 5, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a bankruptcy and application for immunity (hereinafter “instant bankruptcy and application for immunity”) with the Seoul Central District Court 2012Hadan11000 (hereinafter “Seoul Central District Court”).

On November 12, 2013, the above court rendered a decision to grant immunity (hereinafter referred to as “decision to grant immunity”) and the above decision became final and conclusive on November 27, 2013. In the above case of bankruptcy and exemption, the claim to grant immunity in this case was not included in the list of creditors.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Gap evidence 2-1, 2, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) The plaintiff asserts that in the course of the bankruptcy and application for immunity of this case, the claim for the transfer of this case was omitted in the creditor list, but it was not maliciously omitted, and thus the plaintiff's obligation to the defendant was also exempted by the immunity decision of this case. 2) The defendant asserts that since the plaintiff knew the existence of the transfer of this case's claim and omitted it from the creditor list in bad faith, the effect of the immunity decision of this case does not extend to the claim for the transfer of this case.

B. Determination 1) The Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Act”)

"Claims that are not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith by an obligor" in subparagraph 7 of Article 566 means the existence of claims before immunity is granted by the obligor.

arrow