1. The Plaintiff A among the distribution schedule prepared on November 4, 2013 by the said court with respect to the distribution procedure case of Suwon District Court D.

1. Basic facts

A. The payment order of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E Co., Ltd.”) issued an order for the payment of KRW 18,487,700 to Plaintiff A and damages for delay from July 1, 2013 to August 6, 2013 was finalized on and after August 22, 2013. Plaintiff A received a provisional attachment order for the claim for construction price against E Co., Ltd. at the time of the strike of E Co., Ltd. (Korean Government District Court Decision 2013Kadan826) on July 22, 2013.

B. On August 6, 2013, the payment order ordering the Plaintiff Company B to pay KRW 13,772,00 and delay damages therefor was finalized on August 6, 2013, and Plaintiff B was issued a provisional attachment order on the claim for construction price against the E Company’s strike on July 22, 2013 (Korean Government District Court High Court Decision 2013Kadan820).

C. On the other hand, on July 17, 2013, the Defendant, based on the authentic copy of a notarial deed (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) No. 343, No. 343, No. 2013, which was drafted by a notary public, issued a decision to seize and assign a claim against the claim for construction cost against the E company’s strike (U.S. District Court 2013TT1659, claim amount of KRW 100 million; hereinafter “instant claim attachment and assignment order”).

On August 5, 2013, the Pakistan-si deposited KRW 50,313,570 for the construction cost to be paid to E company on the grounds of attachment competition with the Suwon District Court in Suwon District Court in 2013Hun-2564. On November 4, 2013, the distribution procedure for the said deposit was in progress, and the Plaintiffs did not receive all dividends on the date of distribution, and the amount of KRW 50,349,228, which was deducted from the execution cost, was distributed to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

E. The Plaintiffs raised an objection to the said dividends, and filed the instant lawsuit on November 7, 2013.

F. The defendant is the son of G, the representative director of the E company, who is the F.

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute, and each entry number of Gap 1 to 6.