1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

The court's explanation of this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for a modification of the 6th to 10th of the judgment of the court of first instance, of the 6th to 15th of the 7th of the 6th of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it is citing

The plaintiff asserts that the existence or scope of the right to be preserved for provisional attachment can not be contested in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution since the existence or scope of the right to be preserved for provisional attachment becomes final and conclusive in the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution. However, since a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is sought to revise the distribution schedule or to prepare a new distribution schedule in order to distribute dividends to himself/herself by reducing the amount distributed to him/her in the distribution schedule, the plaintiff is not sufficient to assert and prove that there is no claim of the defendant in order to win the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution and that he/she has the right to receive dividends of the amount he/she paid to the defendant. The defendant can deny the existence of the plaintiff's claim on the grounds that he/she can reject the plaintiff's claim even if he/she did not raise an objection against the plaintiff on the date of distribution (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da4259, Jul. 12, 2012). The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.