A. On January 26, 2016, the Defendant executed a seizure of corporeal movables based on the executory exemplification of the Jeju District Court Decision 2015 tea 2180 regarding Taecheon Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant real estate”)’s decision on payment order, and based on the attached list No. 201 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On January 22, 2016, the Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate in KRW 250 million from Taecheon General Construction Co., Ltd., and agreed to take over the secured debt of KRW 230 million, which was set forth in the instant real estate, and pay the remainder of KRW 20 million on January 25, 2016. The Plaintiff agreed to purchase various equipment, office facilities, goods (book, computers, liftss, shocks, etc.) within the instant real estate, including all equipment, office facilities, goods, etc. in the instant real estate.

C. On January 25, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant real estate. On January 27, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the remainder KRW 20 million to Taelim Integrated Construction Co., Ltd.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the goods listed in the attached list were those owned by the plaintiff at the time of execution of the above seizure, and the execution of seizure against the goods listed in the attached list by the defendant is improper.

Therefore, on January 26, 2016, the defendant, based on the executory exemplification of the decision of the payment order of the Jeju District Court 2015 tea 2180 against Taelim Construction Co., Ltd., the compulsory execution against the goods stated in the attached list should be denied.

The defendant asserts that the above acquisition contract is null and void since the plaintiff acquired the real estate of this case and the articles listed in the attached list from Taechi General Construction Co., Ltd. falsely in order to avoid compulsory execution by Taechi General Construction Co., Ltd., but it cannot be accepted since there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion by the defendant.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified.