1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the Changwon District Court may recognize the fact that, on the date of distribution of the case for compulsory auction of real estate (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), the Changwon District Court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes 8,693,125 won to the Defendant, 3,235,64,619 won to the Defendant, a distribution schedule that distributes KRW 5,619,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000 won

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim is that the Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the designated parties (hereinafter collectively referred to as the Plaintiff and the designated parties) and theO have a claim for overdue wages based on a notarial deed against L workers.

O and the plaintiffs applied for a compulsory auction on the instant real estate based on the notarial deed with the above executory power.

The Changwon District Court should distribute dividends to the plaintiffs who are the wage creditors entitled to the top priority payment, but did not distribute dividends to the plaintiffs, so the said dividends are unlawful.

Therefore, the distribution schedule should be modified to distribute the wages in arrears, such as the statement of the cause of the claim, to the plaintiffs, and the defendants' dividends should be deleted.

B. A creditor who has an executory exemplification of judgment, a creditor who has effected a provisional seizure subsequent to the registration of a decision to commence the auction, or a creditor who has the right to demand a preferential reimbursement under the Civil Act, the Commercial Act and other Acts, may receive a distribution only by the case where he/she makes a demand for distribution not later than the completion period to demand a distribution. In cases where a legitimate demand for distribution has not been made, even if

(Article 88(1) and Article 148 subparag. 2 of the Civil Execution Act, Supreme Court Decision 2008Da65242 Decided December 24, 2008). In addition, we can see the following.