1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On June 10, 2008, the Defendant filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court for a payment order as Seoul Central District Court 2008Guj32035 against the Plaintiff after Nonparty C finally acquired the card payment claim against the Plaintiff. On June 10, 2008, the above court filed an application for a payment order with the Plaintiff and filed a lawsuit for the claim for the payment of the payment amount, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant the amount of KRW 14,172,306 and the amount of KRW 4,072,482 per annum from May 21, 2008 to the date of full payment. The payment order of this case is the payment order of this case, and the claim of the payment order of this case is the claim of this case.

issued this chapter.

On June 17, 2008, the Plaintiff received the original copy of the instant payment order, and the instant payment order was finalized on July 2, 2008.

B. On September 12, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for immunity with the Seoul Central District Court No. 5022, 5022, 2016Hadan50222. On February 16, 2017, the Plaintiff made a decision to grant immunity to the Plaintiff and became final and conclusive on March 4, 2017.

The decision to grant immunity of this case is referred to as the "decision to grant immunity of this case".

3) At the time of the application for bankruptcy exemption, the Plaintiff did not enter the Defendant’s claim in the list of creditors at the time of the application for bankruptcy exemption. [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 (including the

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should be rejected, barring any special circumstance, inasmuch as the Defendant’s claims based on the final judgment of this case against the Plaintiff constitute bankruptcy claims, and the immunity decision of this case is exempted from the Plaintiff’s liability pursuant to the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Act

B. The Defendant’s claim regarding the Defendant’s assertion was known to the Plaintiff at the time of filing an application for bankruptcy immunity, and the Defendant did not enter the Defendant’s claim in the creditors’ list in bad faith.