A. On July 30, 2015, the Defendant, between Nonparty F, Incorporated H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”), and I, set out and lent KRW 1,242,00,000 to F on November 14, 2014 at KRW 20 per annum and interest rate of August 31, 2015; H and I jointly and severally guaranteed the F’s obligation; and, if the said obligor fails to perform the said obligation, set up a notarial deed of money loan agreement (No. 662 of July 30, 2015) that recognizes that there is no objection even if compulsory execution is conducted by the said obligor.

(hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”). (b)

On October 26, 2015, the Defendant: (a) executed the corporeal movables in the instant No. 1 of the [Attachment List No. 1] with the title to execute the notarial deeds; (b) the amount claimed as KRW 1,432,002,052 (hereinafter “the first seizure execution”); and (c) again, on November 9, 2015, with the title to execute the said notarial deeds, the corporeal movables in the attached Table No. 2 of the [Attachment No. 2015No370, the amount claimed as KRW 1,46,734,929 (hereinafter “the second seizure execution”).

(hereinafter referred to as "execution of attachment of this case" in total of the above 1 and 2 executions of attachment . / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1, 13 and 14 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. Each corporeal movable property listed in the separate list of the plaintiffs' assertion is owned by the plaintiffs who jointly purchased money. Thus, the execution of the seizure of this case based on the F's executive title is unlawful.

B. (1) In full view of each of the statements or videos, F, J, and I’s testimony, the Plaintiffs are jointly from J and K around September 4, 2015, when comprehensively taking into account the following facts: (a) 11, and 15 through 25, each of the statements or videos, F, J, and I’s testimony.