1. The lease contract concluded between the Defendant and B on May 9, 2016 with respect to the building indicated in the attached list shall be revoked.

2...

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

2. Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act (Judgment by public notice) of the applicable provisions of Acts;

3. Repreparation a distribution schedule;

A. In a case where several creditors file a lawsuit of demurrer against each other and seek to distribute all or part of the dividends to the other party individually, in a case where each of the above lawsuits is consolidated by the same division, it is possible to order the re-preparation of the distribution schedule by specifying the amount of dividends disputed in the main text. However, in a case where each of the above lawsuits is concurrently examined or is tried in another division, it is inappropriate to set the creditors entitled to receive dividends and the amount thereof by judgment, and thus, it is not appropriate to set the distribution schedule again by undergoing other distribution procedures.

(Judgment on a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution under Article 157 of the Civil Execution Act (Judgment on a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution) under the latter part of Article 157 of the Civil Execution Act, the creditor entitled to receive dividends and the amount thereof shall be determined in a judgment on the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution. When it is deemed inappropriate to set such a judgment, the court shall make a distribution schedule again and order to take other distribution procedures in its judgment. See Supreme Court Decision 2015Da201824 Decided April 23, 2015.

On the date of distribution of the auction procedure of this case, in order to preserve the claim against B by the Chungcheong Credit Guarantee Foundation, as a provisional seizure creditor who attached a provisional attachment on the real estate listed in the attached Table in order to preserve the claim against B, an objection is raised against KRW 9,479,40 out of the amount of dividends against the defendant (Cheongju District Court Decision 2017Gadan20513), and the plaintiff raised an objection against the distribution of KRW 12,568,334 out of the amount of dividends against the defendant in the position of creditor demanding distribution against B, and the fact that the plaintiff raised an objection against the objection against the distribution of this case is clearly recorded in the record.