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

A. The Plaintiff, as a creditor of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”), provisionally seized the claim amount as KRW 317,900,000 on October 27, 2016, which was owned by the Nonparty Company as the Seoul Southern District Court 2016Kadan203844, on October 27, 2016, with respect to the 14th floor F of the building Geumcheon-gu, Geumcheon-gu Seoul E-gu

B. On April 26, 2018, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) to distribute KRW 34,765,628 out of KRW 640,733,953, which is to be actually distributed on the date of distribution on April 26, 2018 to the Defendant as the first priority wage obligee, as the Defendant as the first priority wage obligee, and KRW 20,683,972 to the Defendant as the Defendant as the first priority wage obligee, and KRW 242,986,986 to the Defendant as the first priority provisional attachment obligee, who is the first priority provisional attachment obligee, as the Defendant as the first priority provisional attachment obligee, and KRW 17,53,485,00 to the Plaintiff as the first priority provisional attachment obligee (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

C. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and raised an objection to the total amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on April 30, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant engaged in partnership with G, a representative director of the non-party company, and is not a wage creditor who received wages as an employee of the non-party company.

Therefore, the dividend table of this case prepared by the defendant on the premise that the defendant is a wage obligee should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim.

B. We examine the judgment, however, there is no evidence to conclude that the defendant is in the partnership relationship with G, the representative of the non-party company.

Rather, if the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the statements in the Evidence Nos. 1 through 7 and 9 through 13 (including numbers, if any), the defendant entered into an annual salary contract with the non-party company on April 1, 201, and the defendant was covered by the non-party company four insurance from the time of entry to the time of retirement, and the defendant was the non-party company.