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

A. It is true that the Plaintiff alleged that he borrowed part of the money from Defendant B. However, if the amount of the above loan is offset against the equivalent amount of the loan, etc. held by the Plaintiff against the Defendant B, the remaining amount of the debt is less than the amount actually received out of the total amount distributed by the Cheongju District Court E on the real estate owned by the Plaintiff and the court F in the auction procedure of real estate auction (hereinafter “related auction procedure”), Defendant B does not have any claim against the Plaintiff.

Nevertheless, in the auction procedure of this case, the distribution schedule of this case, which was made out to distribute the amount stated in the purport of the claim against Defendant B, is unfair, so it should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim.

B. Determination 1) We examine the following. The burden of proof of grounds for objection to a distribution in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution also complies with the principle of allocation of the burden of proof in general civil procedure. Thus, in a case where the Plaintiff claims that the Defendant’s claim was not constituted, the Plaintiff is liable to prove the facts of the cause of the claim to the Defendant, and in a case where the Plaintiff claims that the claim was null and void as a false declaration of agreement or extinguished by repayment, the Plaintiff is liable to prove the facts constituting the cause of disability or extinction (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da39617, Jul. 12, 2007). However, in the instant case, the Plaintiff’s overall purport of argument as to Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 11, Eul evidence 12, Eul evidence 15, and Eul evidence 15 (including various numbers), and the Plaintiff’s total amount of interest KRW 300,000,000 from Defendant B to 130,01313.231.