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. The Industrial Bank of Korea completed the registration of the establishment of each of the maximum debt amount of Japan on December 16, 199, 1100,000 UN on December 17, 2004, and 1200,000 won on December 17, 2004, with respect to the land and the above-ground buildings (hereinafter “the instant real property”) in the Republic of Korea, in order to secure the claim against the Korean Diplomatics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Diplomatics”).

B. On January 30, 2012, the Industrial Bank of Korea applied for a voluntary auction of the instant real estate based on the foregoing right to collateral security, and rendered a decision to commence auction to Suwon District Court C on January 31, 2012.

(hereinafter referred to as the "Chwon District Court D Auction Case was merged with the above auction procedure).

The plaintiff acquired claims and collateral security from the Industrial Bank of Korea to participate in the above auction procedure.

Upon the sale of the instant real estate in the above auction procedure, the executing court, in the first priority order, issued 472,396,358 won to Defendant A, who is a wage obligee, 9,182,453 won (i.e., 4,711,125 won of retirement allowances from October 16, 201 to January 15, 201), and 11,352,740 won to Defendant B (i.e., 7,50,000 won of wages to October 16, 201, and 3,852,740 won of retirement allowances from January 15, 201) to Defendant B, in the order of priority, to grant the Plaintiff a dividend distribution schedule of KRW 4,930,835 won to G, 307,397,3947,397,3947,397,397,397,397, and 294.

E. On March 3, 2014, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the dividend amount of the Defendants on the date of distribution, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on March 7, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, 6 and 7, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. In light of the fact that the non-party company discontinued ex officio as of June 30, 201, and in particular, Defendant B served in H company from June 201, and received monthly wages, the Defendants were the non-party company until June 30, 201.