1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not.

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleadings as to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2, and 3, the defendant was sentenced to the judgment on December 9, 2009, stating that "A shall be paid 25% interest per annum from April 22, 2006 to the day of full payment," with the plaintiff and Eul as the debtor, the National Health Insurance Corporation as the third debtor on the basis of the deposit money return claim against the plaintiff, and 130,054,794 won, and 130,000 won among them, "A shall be paid at the rate of 25% interest per annum from April 22, 2006 to the day of full payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive at that time; ② The defendant may receive a provisional seizure order from the plaintiff as the debtor, the National Health Insurance Corporation as the third debtor, and the defendant may be found to have received the distribution order from the Seoul Central District Court as the third party debtor on the basis of the dividend return claim against the plaintiff.

(b) In case where the debtor raises an objection against the distribution schedule prepared in the relevant legal principles procedures, the debtor who has raised an objection against the creditor who does not have an executory exemplification (excluding the provisional seizure creditor), shall file a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution, and the debtor who has raised an objection against the creditor who has an executory exemplification of executive titles, shall file a lawsuit of objection against the claim;

(Article 256 and Article 154(1) and (2) of the Civil Execution Act. If a debtor who has raised an objection against a creditor who has an executory exemplification, a lawsuit of demurrer against a distribution is not a lawsuit of demurrer against a claim.