제3자이의
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The fact that the enforcement officer affiliated with the same court seizes the articles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant articles”) on June 13, 2019 in the compulsory execution procedure for corporeal movables D by the Gwangju District Court based on the executory protocol of the loan case against Nonparty B, which was filed by the Defendant based on the executory protocol of the Gwangju District Court 2015Da4549 against Nonparty B, does not conflict between the parties.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that the instant goods are owned by the Plaintiff purchased with the Plaintiff’s credit card on April 11, 2019 as the cause of the instant claim, and that compulsory execution therefor is unjust as to the goods not owned by the obligor.
3. We do not have any evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff purchased the instant article on its account.
Rather, Article 190 of the Civil Execution Act provides that corporeal movables jointly possessed by the debtor and his spouse may be seized pursuant to the provisions of Article 189 of the Civil Execution Act, and comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in subparagraphs 1 through 6 above, the Plaintiff married with B on January 8, 2007, the address in the Gwangju District Court 2015Kadan449, B’s address in the protocol of compromise in the loan case, and the Plaintiff’s address as indicated in the complaint in this case, and the enforcement officer in charge of compulsory execution of corporeal movables in the Gwangju District Court Do District Do Do 2 was in the address of the Plaintiff and B on June 13, 2019, the fact that the enforcement officer in charge of execution of seizure of the goods in this case was present at the time of execution of seizure of the goods in this case, and was present at the time of completion of the procedure by opening a door door, and that most of the goods in this case is a household house provided
If facts are as above, even if the goods of this case were to be purchased on the Plaintiff’s account, the goods of this case shall be presumed to be jointly owned by the Plaintiff and B for running a marital life, and therefore, the goods of this case shall be presumed to be the property