2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The public prosecutor C of the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office ordered the enforcement officer of the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office to collect a surcharge from the person liable for payment under Article 4910 of the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office No. 201, the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office affiliated with the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office (hereinafter “instant enforcement officer”). On December 23, 2014, the enforcement officer E of the said court ordered the said enforcement officer to seize corporeal movables on the attached list (hereinafter “instant articles”) at the instant enforcement site under 6 of the said Court’s 2014.

B. The plaintiff is the husband and wife B.

C. B was confined to the racing prison from May 16, 2008 to November 9, 2010.

After the discharge, a move-in report was made on December 22, 2014, the day before the date of the enforcement ( December 23, 2014) while residing in the place of enforcement of the instant case.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and its judgment are legal couple B and B, but the plaintiff does not reside at the place of execution of this case. Since the goods of this case are purchased by the plaintiff with the intention of friendship, compulsory execution against the goods of this case owned by the plaintiff by the defendant based on the executive title against B is improper.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, since there is no evidence to recognize that the property in this case is the plaintiff's unique property, which is acquired in his name during the marriage of one of the married couple is presumed to be the special property of the nominal owner, but the property of which belongs to one of the married couple is not clear.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.