1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the appeal as to the part concerning J, K, L, E, F, M, G, and H shall be dismissed.

2.

1. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of Paragraph 1 of the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence

2. According to the reasoning of the evidence No. 14-6 and No. 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance as to the legitimacy of appeal against the designated parties (excluding Defendant C) among the instant lawsuit, the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) under the Busan District Court I distribution procedure (hereinafter “instant distribution procedure”) the designated parties K, L, J, J, E, F, M, G, H (hereinafter “the designated parties”) and the Defendant C have selected the designated parties to the instant distribution procedure as the designated parties; (b) the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit as a lawsuit of demurrer to the distribution schedule prepared in the instant distribution procedure on February 17, 2017, as to the distribution schedule prepared by the Plaintiffs as the designated parties to the instant lawsuit; (c) the Plaintiffs did not separately or separately attach eight designated parties to the instant distribution procedure; and (d) the part indicated by the complaint of this case and the part indicated by the Defendant C, other than Defendant D, indicated as the “party to the instant claim” to the court.

In addition, an objection against a distribution schedule shall be raised against a debtor and a creditor who were present on the date of distribution, who is recorded as being distributed to such distribution schedule. If a designated party is selected in a distribution procedure, only the designated party who is not the designated party is entitled to receive dividends as such creditor. Thus, in a case where only the designated party and the other party are entitled to raise an objection against the distribution schedule, and the designated party, who is a creditor, raises an objection against the total amount stated as being distributed to other creditors, such objection does not extinguish a common interest between the designated party and the relevant designated party, and thus, the designated party revoked the designated party's act of appointing the court.

(1) the appointing party.