1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant is modified as follows.

Seoul Northern District Court D (E) (Duplicate).

1. Basic facts

A. On January 17, 2017, the Plaintiff’s status as the Plaintiff received a decision of provisional seizure of real estate with the claim amounting to KRW 950,438,356 as the Seoul Central District Court 2017Kadan80515 on each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) (hereinafter “instant real estate”). The registration of provisional seizure was completed on the same day.

B. The Seoul Northern District Court, upon the application of the Industrial Bank of Korea, rendered a decision to voluntarily commence the auction of the instant real estate on March 9, 2017, and ② upon the application of the Bank of Korea, rendered a decision to voluntarily commence the auction of the instant real estate on March 10, 2017. The instant real estate was sold on October 31, 2017.

C. The Seoul Northern District Court: (a) determined the amount of actual dividends of KRW 2,194,635,245 as follows: (b) the sales proceeds of the instant real estate amounting to KRW 2,201,70,000,000 on the date of distribution implemented on December 15, 2017; and (c) determined the remainder of KRW 2,194,635,245 by adding the sales proceeds of the instant real estate to KRW 2,201,70,000, and deducting the enforcement costs of KRW 7,313

The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s distribution schedule are as follows. Of them, the Plaintiff’s distribution schedule related to the Plaintiff and the Defendant are as follows. The Plaintiff’s distribution ranking of 12 112 claims (wons) 950,438,356,111,17297,744,52413,966,166,747 111,172 97,744,744,524,524, 476,7772 3.41% of the dividend ratio 100% of 1003.41% of the dividend ratio of the Plaintiff and the Defendant (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017Kadan80515) were presented to the Plaintiff’s creditors (general wage creditors), wage creditors (Seoul District Court Decision 2017Kadan17424,1742, Feb. 27, 2012). The Plaintiff was present in the Defendant’s distribution schedule against the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 8, 9 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The defendant is the representative director of the non-party company I.