1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

1. In the auction procedure of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the instant distribution schedule should be revised so that the dividend amount received by the Defendants, who are not lawful right to demand a distribution, may be distributed to the Plaintiff with a legitimate title.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. Defendant Acheon-si, Defendant B, and the Plaintiff did not have standing to sue a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, since the Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution of this case and raised an objection against the distribution schedule of this case.

(2) The defendant who did not make any defense of this security shall be judged ex officio). (2)

A person who has standing to sue in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution was present on the date of distribution and raised an objection under the substantive nature on the distribution schedule, and thus, a person who was present on the date of distribution and did not raise an objection under the substantive nature on the distribution schedule has no standing to sue in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da63155 Decided September 4, 2002, etc.). Meanwhile, whether or not the procedure in the auction procedure of real estate was lawfully made is the only evidentiary material to which the entry in the auction protocol is recorded (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 94Ma1121, Aug. 22, 1994).

In light of the above legal principles, it is acknowledged that the Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution of this case and raised an objection against the distribution schedule of this case, according to the statement of evidence No. 1, Eul, Eul, was only the debtor D, and no other evidence exists to prove that the Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the distribution schedule. Thus, the Plaintiff did not have the standing to sue to institute the lawsuit of this case.

The plaintiff asserts that D's statement of objection on the date of distribution of this case on behalf of the plaintiff, as the plaintiff's friendship as delegated by the plaintiff, should be viewed as the plaintiff's statement of objection.