A. On October 15, 2015, the Defendant lent KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff’s married couple B.

(B) The Defendant’s above loan claims (hereinafter “instant loan claims”). B.

The Plaintiff filed a payment order with the Seoul Western District Court 2017 tea51765 against B, and was issued a payment order on July 5, 2017.

On September 14, 2017, the Plaintiff, based on the above payment order, seized each of the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant corporeal movables”), under this Court No. 2017No. 2631.

C. B filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption with the Suwon District Court 2017Hadan1120, 2017 Ga 101120, and 2017 Ga 10120, entered the instant loan claims in the list of creditors, and was declared bankrupt on February 9, 2018 and granted immunity on May 17, 2018, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 and 2-2, and the purport of the whole facts and arguments in this court

2. The Defendant’s judgment on the main defense of this case’s defense is unlawful, since the Plaintiff did not submit any evidence to prove that the corporeal movables of this case were their own ownership, the Plaintiff did not have the standing to sue of a third party’s lawsuit and the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

The standing to sue of a third party is a third party who asserts that he/she has ownership on the subject matter of execution, or has a right to prevent transfer or delivery, and the issue of whether he/she has such right is actually determined in the subject matter of execution.

The plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case by asserting that the corporeal movables in this case are owned by himself, and thus, the third party's standing to sue exists.

Therefore, the defendant's main defense is without merit.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant corporeal movables were purchased by the Plaintiff regardless of B, as well as that immunity was granted in B’s bankruptcy proceeding, and thus, based on the instant judgment.