1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

A lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is unlawful in cases where a third party, who has ownership or a right to prevent transfer or delivery of an object of compulsory execution, raises an objection against compulsory execution that is practically being carried out by infringing on such ownership or right, and seeks the exclusion of enforcement. Thus, in cases where a lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is filed after the completion of the pertinent compulsory execution, or a compulsory execution that existed at the time of filing a lawsuit by a third party is terminated during the course of the lawsuit, it

I would like to say.

(1) In light of the purport of the entire argument in subparagraph 5, the Defendant’s execution of the articles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant articles”) on July 21, 2016, based on the executory exemplification of payment order issued on March 17, 2016, on the basis of the original copy of the payment order issued on July 21, 2016, on August 25, 2016, the instant articles were sold to B and the payment was made in full, and the Defendant, as the executory creditor, can be acknowledged as having received the proceeds of the auction.

According to the above facts, compulsory execution against the goods of this case for which the plaintiff sought non-permission of compulsory execution has been terminated while the lawsuit is pending, so the lawsuit of objection by the third party of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

Therefore, we decide to dismiss the lawsuit of this case and decide as per Disposition.