1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff asserts that, inasmuch as the Plaintiff was sentenced to the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015Da115181 Decided September 2, 2015 by using a false loan certificate that the Defendant received in advance from the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff asserts that the seizure and collection procedure of the claim based on the invalid judgment and distribution procedure should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim.

The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is unlawful, since the defendant constitutes a creditor who has an executory exemplification of executive title.

2. In case where the debtor raises an objection against the distribution schedule prepared in the distribution procedure for determining the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit, the debtor who has raised an objection against the creditor who does not have the executory exemplification shall file a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution, and the debtor who has raised an objection against the creditor who has the executory exemplification of executive titles shall file a lawsuit of objection against the claim.

(Articles 256 and 154(1) and (2) of the Civil Execution Act. Therefore, in a case where a debtor raises an objection against a creditor who has an executory exemplification on the date of distribution, and thereafter files a lawsuit of demurrer against a distribution, not by filing a lawsuit of demurrer against the said creditor, the said lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is unlawful.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2004Da72464 Decided April 14, 2005, and 2013Da86403 Decided April 23, 2015, etc.). Based on the above legal principles, the Plaintiff is the obligor of the dividend procedure case as indicated in the purport of the claim, the evidence, and the overall purport of pleadings, comprehensively taking into account the following: (a) the Plaintiff is a creditor against the Plaintiff, who is an executory creditor against the Plaintiff; (b) the Defendant is a creditor against the Plaintiff, who has an executory exemplification of the judgment against the Plaintiff; (c) however, it is recognized that the Plaintiff raised an objection against the existence or scope of the claim asserted by the Defendant; (d) therefore, the Plaintiff, the obligor against the