1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Office of Education of Ulsan Metropolitan City deposited KRW 19,91,491,491, and KRW 5148,22,920 on December 15, 201, the Defendants deposited both of the aforementioned dividends in the Ulsan District Court of Ulsan District on November 18, 2008, which was issued with an order of seizure of claims against the Defendants, including the seizure of claims against the debtor as the Plaintiff, and Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act as the cause of deposit.

3) However, the plaintiff was under the individual rehabilitation procedure at the time, but the Office of Education of Ulsan Metropolitan City deposited the above money, and each of the distribution procedures in relation to each of the above deposit is null and void because it was conducted to interfere with the plaintiff's individual rehabilitation procedure. (b) Determination ex officio as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit in this case, it is recognized that the judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the plaintiff's legal status at the time of apprehension and danger, and even though the lawsuit for confirmation is possible to bring a lawsuit for performance, it is not a final solution of the dispute, and thus there is no benefit of confirmation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da60239, Mar. 9, 2006). The plaintiff asserted that the defendants received each of the above deposits in each of the above distribution procedures and deposited the above money, and thus, it is invalid to bring a lawsuit against the defendants for restitution of unjust enrichment.

The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is a demurrer against the distribution that seeks correction of the distribution schedule.