1. The plaintiff (Appointed)'s claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that only the amount indicated in the dividend amount column in the attached table No. 1 is distributed as a wage obligee in the case of distribution procedures indicated in the claim’s claim, but the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) asserts that the instant distribution schedule should be revised by reducing the amount of dividends to the Defendants, subordinate creditors, and increasing the amount of dividends to the designated parties, even if the actual designated parties’ claim was smaller than that of the aforementioned amount.

[However, even according to the plaintiff's assertion, the above purport of the claim is erroneous, but as long as the plaintiff (appointed party)'s claim is dismissed as seen below, the claim is not corrected. However, in the above claim distribution procedure case, the amount to be distributed to the designated party is limited to the amount of claims seized by the designated party, and the amount is not extended because the designated party submitted additional statement of claim (Evidence A2) after the third debtor filed a report on the reason of deposit.

The attachment by the designated parties was made over two occasions by the Suwon District Court Ansan Branch 2009TT 2925 (Evidence 4-1) and 2009T 5054 (Evidence 4-2). On the other hand, according to the evidence No. 12, the above evidence No. 2009T 2925 (Evidence 4-2) was not included at the time of reporting deposit. In light of this, the entry of evidence No. 4-1 in the above evidence No. 2009T 2925 and collection order cannot be seen as being lawfully delivered to the third debtor.

Therefore, the amount to be distributed to the designated parties shall be limited to the amount seized by the above 2009TT 5054.