beta
울산지방법원 2018.08.10 2018가단7923

제3자이의

Text

1. The Defendant’s executory exemplification of the notarial deed No. 300 of 2017 against Nonparty C is a law firm international document against Nonparty C.

Reasons

According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, the defendant, based on the No. 30 of March 30, 2018, based on the No. 30 of the No. 30 of the No. 1, the No. 1, the No. 201, and the No. 608 of the No. 1, the defendant, based on the No. 1's No. 3

In full view of the evidence Nos. 2 and 3-1 of the evidence Nos. 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff can recognize the fact that he acquired ownership of the above apartment on March 3, 200 and has resided in it so far. In full view of these facts and the fact that the residence of the above apartment E in the resident registration No. 3-2, it is reasonable to see that the above apartment is owned by the plaintiff.

Therefore, it is not permissible for the Defendant to enforce compulsory execution against the instant goods based on the enforcement title against C.

The plaintiff's claim shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning.