1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the following facts can be acknowledged:

On June 19, 2014, Busan District Court prepared a distribution schedule to distribute 367,058,975 won to the defendant, who is the person having the right to demand distribution, and 803,239 won to the case of the plaintiff, who is the person having the right to demand distribution, on the date of distribution of the auction case of this case.

2. The plaintiff submitted the complaint in this case to the effect that he did not claim the amount of dividends of KRW 803,239 as the collection right holder. In the auction case of this case, the plaintiff's assertion that he received dividends as the collection right holder is not eligible to dispute about the amount of dividends, even though the plaintiff's assertion that he received dividends as the collection right holder in the auction case of this case is "Dak, ki,"

- Even if the instant lawsuit is lawful, AA entered into the instant agreement in the name of the joint representative director of the Z and the AF, his wife, after taking over management and business rights, and the amount borrowed therefrom was used as the business funds of the Z, and due to such circumstance, it is reasonable to deem that the Z did not object to the instant payment order as requested by the Defendant. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant’s loan claims against the Z were valid or valid through ratification (Article 139 of the Civil Act).

3. As such, the lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution of this case is dismissed in an unlawful manner, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair in conclusion, and thus, it is dismissed in the lawsuit of this case.