1. It shall be prepared by the above court on February 21, 2018 with respect to a compulsory auction case for real estate D in the Chungcheong District Court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 30, 2007, E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) completed the registration of creation of a collateral security (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) with respect to the real estate listed in the separate list owned by the debtor company (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on April 30, 2007, in order to secure the debtor company G (hereinafter “debtor company”).

B. On June 28, 2017, the Plaintiff was transferred before transfer under the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, and met the requirements for setting up against the Plaintiff under the said Act.

C. On December 27, 2016, E received a voluntary decision to commence the auction of the instant real estate from the Cheongju District Court H, and the said auction procedure overlaps with the said court D compulsory auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), on February 21, 2018, the distribution schedule was formulated, including the distribution of KRW 5,940,128 to Defendant B, KRW 12,629,870 to Defendant C, KRW 15,00,00 to Defendant Labor Welfare Corporation, and KRW 393,849,806 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), and the Plaintiff raised an objection against the entire dividend amount of the Defendants (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 through 6, 17, 18 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection against distribution in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is also in accordance with the principle of distribution of burden of proof in general civil procedure. Therefore, in a case where the plaintiff asserts that the claim of the defendant has not been constituted, the defendant is

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da39617 Decided July 12, 2007). B.

As the Plaintiff, on the part related to Defendant B, retired from the debtor company on February 13, 2013, Defendant B shall be the subsequent wages and retirement allowances.