1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. In the Incheon District Court B real estate auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) with respect to Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City 203 Floor C 203 (hereinafter “instant apartment”), the Defendant, who is the person holding the provisional seizure, filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

B. On March 3, 2016, a court of execution prepared and presented a distribution schedule of KRW 19,702,055 to the Defendant, who was the date of distribution, and to distribute KRW 0 to the Plaintiff who was the debtor and the owner, who was the debtor and the owner (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), the Plaintiff raised an objection against the total amount of dividends to the Defendant.

C. On March 9, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Incheon District Court 2014 installments 68475 and received a decision to authorize the repayment plan.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff, in the individual rehabilitation case, received a decision to authorize the repayment plan and made a repayment in installments according to the repayment plan. The defendant's receiving distribution in the auction procedure of this case constitutes unjust enrichment and thus, it is necessary to revise the distribution schedule of this case by changing the amount of distribution to zero won.

B. Determination 1) Upon receipt of an order to commence individual rehabilitation procedures, compulsory execution, provisional seizure or provisional disposition against property belonging to the individual rehabilitation estate on the basis of individual rehabilitation claims listed in the list of creditors (Article 600(1)2 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act) shall be suspended or prohibited (Article 600(1)2 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act), and when a decision to authorize the repayment plan is made, compulsory execution, provisional seizure or provisional disposition based on the individual rehabilitation claims suspended pursuant to Article 600 shall lose its effect: Provided, That the same shall not apply to cases where it is otherwise prescribed in the decision to authorize the repayment plan or the repayment plan (Article 615(3)2 of the same Act).