1. Incheon District Court Decision 2010Da35797 Decided June 30, 2010 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff and June 17, 2010.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant received the following judgment against the Plaintiff around 2010.

① In the Incheon District Court Decision 2010Gau35797 Decided June 30, 2010, the amount of 1,554,880 won for indemnity and the delay damages therefor shall be paid (2) in the Supreme Court Decision 2010Gau35902 Decided June 17, 2010, the amount of 2,191,380 won for indemnity and the delay damages shall be paid.

On June 28, 2013, the Plaintiff was granted immunity in Incheon District Court 2012, 4959 (Immunity) and 2012Hadan4966 (Declaration of Bankruptcy), and the above immunity became final and conclusive around that time.

However, in the process, the plaintiff did not enter the defendant's claim for reimbursement in the list of creditors.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including a tentative number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. Both claims;

A. Article 566 subparag. 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that “a claim that is not recorded in the list of creditors in bad faith by an obligor” refers to a case where the obligor, despite being aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, is not recorded 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 provision, but if the obligor was aware of the existence of an obligation, it constitutes a non-exempt claim under the above provision even if the obligor was negligent

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da49083, Oct. 14, 2010). B.

Plaintiff

The Plaintiff was granted immunity in consideration of these circumstances as a recipient of basic living benefits with disabilities of class 3 with disabilities.

Even if the defendant's claim for indemnity was not included in the exemption process, the plaintiff was not aware of such defendant's claim in the course of bankruptcy and exemption.

Therefore, the plaintiff was exempted from liability.