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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

However, with regard to the defendant's assertion that the appellate court has repeated, the following judgments are added.

The Defendant asserts that compulsory execution under the instant agreement is against Chapter 43, which is merely 0.5% of the total 8,751, following the withdrawal of the application for compulsory execution case by Seoul Central District Court 2014No3549, Jul. 1, 2014, which was newly filed by the Busan Central District Court Branch 2014No. 2014No. 203, Jul. 1, 2014.

After the Plaintiff applied for a new enforcement on July 1, 2014 as Incheon District Court Branch Branch 2014Du2393, the Plaintiff did not have any compulsory enforcement on the instant pen. The Plaintiff received 36,000,000 won from C on July 29, 2014 from the Plaintiff on June 2014 and received 36,00,000 won as to the rent for September 21, 2014 and October 2014 from Empt Co., Ltd. as the third debtor, and received the attachment and collection order of the claim against Empt as the third debtor, and received 70,008,000 won in the dividend procedure and received 70,008,000 won in the distribution procedure, and the Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the purport of the entire collection order from No. 36,000,000 won in the claim and the entire collection order from No. 15,50,000 won among the parties.

However, as recognized by the first instance judgment based on the evidence, the Plaintiff’s withdrawal of an existing application for compulsory execution and application for a new compulsory execution are deemed to have been subject to consultation with the Defendant, and it is ratified that the Plaintiff renounces compulsory execution against the instant land and the ownership is transferred to the Defendant solely based on the facts acknowledged earlier.