1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Defendants seek rectification of the distribution schedule exceeding KRW 8,333,333, respectively.

1. The remaining facts, excluding the part of the Plaintiff’s statement of objection to the distribution against the Defendants on the date of distribution, among the facts constituting the grounds for a claim attached to the attached Form, are deemed to have been led to the confession by the Defendants. According to the entries in Gap 9-1, the Plaintiff was present on the date of distribution on the date of distribution and raised an objection against each of KRW 8,33,333 out of the dividend amount against the Defendants. The Plaintiff’s filing of the instant lawsuit on August 28, 2017, which was within seven days from the date of distribution, is apparent in the record.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Defendants were the most lessee, and that the distribution schedule should be revised by striking KRW 15 million each of the dividend amounts against the Defendants among the instant distribution schedule, and that all of them should be distributed to the Plaintiff.

B. We examine the legitimacy of the part that the ex officio determination Plaintiff seeks correction of the distribution schedule exceeding KRW 8,33,333, which raised an objection against the Defendants on the date of distribution.

In light of the legal nature of a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution or the principle of disposition right by the parties, the purport of a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is required to clearly indicate the scope to be denied out of the dividend amount of the creditors stated in the distribution schedule within the scope of objection filed on the date of distribution (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da70983, Jun. 9, 200). Furthermore, only the creditors or debtors who have raised an objection as to the distribution schedule on the date of distribution are qualified as the plaintiff in the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution (see, e.g., Article 154(1) of the Civil Execution Act), and seeking modification of the distribution schedule against the portion not raised an objection on the date of distribution is an objection against the part on which the distribution was already completed, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there is a benefit of lawsuit.

(see, e.g., Article 152(3) of the Civil Execution Act). Therefore, the scope of seeking rectification of a distribution schedule in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is limited.