A. The Defendant has a claim based on the No. 3261 of the No. 3261 of the notarial deed prepared by a notary public on October 8, 2010 against Nonparty C, the Plaintiff’s spouse, who is a non-party C.

B. On July 26, 2016, on the basis of the enforcement title against Nonparty C, the Defendant filed an application for compulsory execution against Nonparty C’s corporeal movables as indicated in the attached Form No. 701, the Plaintiff and Nonparty C’s domicile, Busan Shipping Daegu D apartment, the domicile of Nonparty C, and the attached Form No. 101, Dong 701.

C. The Plaintiff purchased, respectively, No. 9, No. 11, 13, 15, 16, 19, and 19, respectively, on July 10, 2014, from each auction date, for which the Defendant filed an application for compulsory execution of corporeal movables with the Busan District Court’s Dong Branch Branch under the same title of execution, as indicated in the attached Table 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 14, 17, 20, 21, and 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, and 19, respectively.

On the other hand, Nonparty C is detained on December 31, 2014, and is now confined to prison until now.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 to 3 evidence, each entry (including additional number), Eul 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Even during the judgment marriage, the property acquired by one of the married couple in his/her own name is the unique property, and only the property the ownership of which is unclear shall be presumed to be jointly owned by the married couple.

However, as seen above, the articles Nos. 2 through 6, 9, 11, 13 through 17, and 19 through 21 are the Plaintiff’s unique property, since they were purchased at the auction procedure conducted by the Defendant under his/her own name.

In addition, according to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 4-1 through 5 and the entire argument, each Aircomer Nos. 1 and 10 in the attached Table Nos. 4-1 and 10 may recognize that the plaintiff purchased each of the facts in the attached Table No. 12 on April 2015. Thus, the plaintiff's peculiar property is the plaintiff's unique property.

Next, the Plaintiff used corporeal movables Nos. 7, 8, and 18 in the attached table Nos. 7, 8, and 18 by Nonparty E, the Plaintiff’s omission.