A. In the distribution procedure case of the Jeonju District Court C, the plaintiff is the debtor, and the defendant is the creditor demanding distribution.

B. In the foregoing distribution procedure case, the Jeonju District Court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes the amount of KRW 25,302,077 out of KRW 33,837,423 to the Defendant on October 27, 2014, and the Plaintiff raised an objection as to the distribution against the Defendant.

C. In the above distribution procedure case, the Defendant made a demand for distribution based on the No. 848 of the No. 848 of the 2007 deed No. 848, a notary public prepared by Han-gu General Law Office on May 31, 2007 (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”). D.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant (No. 2014da39130) on September 15, 2015 and won a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant (No. 2015Na8851), but the Defendant appealed with the Jeonju District Court 2015Na8851, but the Defendant’s appeal was dismissed on November 4, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 24, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the notarial deed of this case is made by the commission of the defendant who has no legitimate authority to act for the plaintiff, and is null and void, and compulsory execution based thereon shall not be permitted. As such, among the dividend table prepared by the preceding district court C in October 27, 2014, the amount of dividend against the defendant prepared on the basis of the notarial deed of this case shall be deleted.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.