제3자이의
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On April 2, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a favorable judgment of the Defendant (U.S. District Court 2015Da9386, hereinafter “instant judgment”) that “C and D shall jointly and severally pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 30,00,000 and 20% per annum from May 11, 2015 to the date of full payment.” The instant judgment became final and conclusive on September 4, 2015.
B. After that, the Defendant filed an application for compulsory execution against each of the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet in the 102 Dong Dong-dong 1701 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in Gwangju city, where the Plaintiff and C reside as the executive title, and accordingly, on October 18, 2016, seizure of each of the said corporeal movables (U.S. District Court Sungnam Branch Branch Branch Office 2016No220) was executed.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Each of the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 6, 8, 9, and 9 of the Plaintiff’s assertion (hereinafter “each of the instant corporeal movables”) is corporeal movables owned by the Plaintiff purchased. Therefore, a compulsory execution against each of the instant corporeal movables shall be dismissed.
B. The reasoning of the judgment below is insufficient to acknowledge that the plaintiff purchased each of the corporeal movables of this case by only the statements in Gap's evidence Nos. 8 and 9, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
According to Gap evidence No. 1 and evidence No. 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings, although the plaintiff was an apartment leased from F on February 27, 2016, it is acknowledged that the apartment of this case is an apartment leased from F on February 27, 2016, and according to the purport of the whole statement and pleading No. 1, C is also acknowledged as having transferred the apartment of this case on October 31, 201. In full view of the above facts of recognition, the apartment of this case No. 3 is first higher than the plaintiff.