1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking revocation on the Defendant’s main defense by asserting that the instant court C dividend procedure, 2015TTT 205TT 20541 and 2015TT 21218 were unlawful.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the above distribution procedure is unlawful, since it is completed by paying dividends in accordance with the distribution schedule finalized by the court of execution.

In addition, the above defense and the remaining parts are judged ex officio.

Comprehensively taking account of the entries in Gap evidence 3-2 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that the date of distribution of the instant case C was opened on February 25, 2016, and the said distribution procedure has been completed.

As long as the distribution procedure is completed, a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the distribution procedure is unlawful as there is no interest in the lawsuit.

(In addition, in light of the fact that an objection against the distribution should be raised after attending the date of distribution and raising an objection, this part of the lawsuit is unlawful). Also, the illegality of the seizure and collection order itself can be contested through the immediate appeal procedure (see Article 229 (6) and (1) of the Civil Execution Act). Therefore, it is unlawful to dispute by a separate lawsuit because there is no benefit of lawsuit.

2. In conclusion, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.