A. On January 31, 2019, the Defendant: (a) based on the notarial deed (No. 564) executed by a notary public of C with the executory power of No. 564, 2018 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”); (b) executed the attachment of each of the items listed in the separate sheet in the building E and F, which is the residence of C; and (c)

B. The plaintiff is residing together in the residence of the omitted C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. Since each of the items listed in the separate sheet stating the gist of the assertion is owned by the Plaintiff as purchased by the Plaintiff, compulsory execution against each of the above items based on the notarial deed of this case shall be dismissed.

B. In full view of the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence No. 2, the articles listed in the separate sheet No. 4 are recognized as being purchased by the plaintiff, and it is deemed as the plaintiff's ownership, and the compulsory execution against the above articles shall be dismissed.

However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the plaintiff purchased only the data submitted by the plaintiff with respect to the articles listed in the remaining list Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit.