1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On April 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a voluntary auction order with the Busan District Court, Dong Branch of the Busan District Court, as to building G on the ground of the Busan District Court and two parcels of land owned by D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “foreign Co., Ltd.”).

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant auction”). (b)

On January 15, 2018, a court of execution of the auction procedure of this case prepared and publicly announced the distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) to distribute the amount of KRW 16,370,97 out of KRW 287,90,09,092 to be actually distributed to the Defendant, the person having the right to demand distribution (the highest wage claim), KRW 198,414,517, which is the person having the right to demand distribution (the highest wage claim), and KRW 198,417, which is the person having the right to demand distribution, to the

C. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and raised an objection to the full amount of KRW 16,370,997 against the Defendant, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on January 17, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1.2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant is not a director of the non-party company and is not an employee under the Labor Standards Act, and the defendant, as an employee of the non-party company, distributes a total of KRW 16,370,997 to the defendant on the premise that the defendant has a retirement allowance claim against

Therefore, the instant dividend table should be revised because the total amount of dividend against the Defendant is added to the amount of dividend against the Plaintiff.

B. (i) In a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, in principle, in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, the Plaintiff has to assert and prove the facts constituting the grounds for objection against distribution. As such, the obligee who filed an objection against distribution by asserting that the other party’s claim is disguised, bears the burden

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da32178 delivered on November 14, 1997). Officers such as directors, auditors, etc. of a stock company are delegated by the company to conduct certain business affairs.