A. On December 28, 2016, the Defendant seized each of the items listed in the separate sheet on December 28, 2016, based on the executory exemplification of the contract deposit case No. 2013 Ghana District Court 2013Gaso2171.

B. Meanwhile, around December 2014, the Plaintiff asked D, a partner, to assemble a computer through the purchase of parts, and transferred D, respectively, the amount of KRW 850,50,500 as the purchase price of computer parts, and KRW 100,000 as the purchase price of computer parts.

D purchased approximately KRW 800,000,000 in total on January 3, 2015 and January 5, 2015.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In the above facts of recognition, if the plaintiff sent to the enforcement officer the claim that the items listed in Paragraph 7 of the attached list are owned by himself at the time of seizure execution, and D purchased the number of parts that can be assembled by two computers, the items listed in the attached list 3 and Paragraph 7 are not owned by C, but owned by the plaintiff.

A compulsory execution against the goods owned by the plaintiff on the basis of the executive title against C may not be permitted.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.