1. Of the distribution schedule prepared by the said court on February 26, 2018 with respect to the distribution procedure case of Suwon District Court E, the Defendants are deemed to be the Defendants.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 26, 2018, F drafted a distribution schedule with the following content (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) in the Suwon District Court E-Distribution Procedure case regarding the deposit deposited by the creditors of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”).

The creditor's dividends (source) 199,49,498,834,834, Defendant B (C) 68,174,816,83, Defendant B (C) 247,370,275, 164, 165, 372, 162, 719, 162, 719, Defendant C (C) 672,426,824, 8248, 218, 487, and 487, Defendant C (C) 46, 426, 8249, Defendant C (C) 164, 164, 1632, 162, 719, and 47, Defendant B (C) 167,165, 167, 1627, 1527, 2314, 2394, 2537, 2947, 193637

B. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and stated an objection to the total amount of distribution to the Defendants, and filed the instant lawsuit on March 2, 2018, within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant in this paragraph")

A. 1) The parties’ assertion 1) Since the Plaintiff’s claim against G does not exist or is null and void, the amount of dividend of the instant distribution schedule ought to be corrected. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that there was a claim against G, such as the loan, indemnity, etc., and the Defendant received dividends in the position of a legitimate collection authority after receiving a seizure and collection order on the ground that the Defendant’s claim was issued with the payment order as an executive title. Therefore, the Plaintiff’

B. The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection against distribution in a lawsuit of demurrer 1 is also in accordance with the principle of distribution of burden of proof in general civil procedure. Therefore, in a case where the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's claim has not been constituted, the defendant is liable to prove the grounds for