1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Upon the application of G, the creditor, the automobile auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) was in progress with respect to the vehicle “YY I” owned by the debtor, the debtor, the H (hereinafter “instant company”). On October 11, 2018, the said court drafted a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) that distributes KRW 27,100,000 from the sale price of the said vehicle to the Defendants, the Korea Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Corporation, etc. as follows.

Korea Labor Welfare Corporation: The Korea Labor Welfare Corporation: The dividend order in the first priority (person entitled to demand a distribution, substitute payment), the dividend amount of 4,00,000 won: the second priority (the person entitled to receive the distribution), the dividend amount of 1,65,340 won: the defendant B: the third priority (mortgager), the dividend amount of 11,492,154 won: the defendant Pju: the fourth priority (the person entitled to attach, the general taxes), the dividend amount of 22,808 won (the Republic of Korea): the dividends amount of 5th priority (the person entitled to receive a distribution, the dividend amount), the dividend amount of 7,77,84 won.

B. On June 1, 2018, the Plaintiff, as a wage obligee at the instant auction procedure, reported and demanded a claim of KRW 5,275,000 for the instant company as a wage obligee.

However, the Busan District Court’s Branch did not recognize the distribution of the Plaintiff, and prepared the instant distribution schedule without recognizing the distribution of the Plaintiff. On October 11, 2018, the Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution of the instant auction procedure and stated an objection against each of the dividend amounts against the Defendants among the instant distribution schedule.

C. On August 29, 2016, the Plaintiff was appointed as an internal director of the instant company, and completed the registration on the same day, and on September 12, 2016, the Plaintiff was appointed as the representative director of the instant company and completed the registration on the same day.

In addition, the business registration of the company of this case was completed as the representative of the plaintiff.

On the other hand, on September 12, 2016, the registration of the above representative director against the plaintiff was completed, J and K as the inside director of the company of this case, and completed each registration on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition]