beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s executory exemplification of the Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2013Kahap1621 Decided July 24, 2013 with respect to B.
Reasons
1. On October 22, 2014, according to the Defendant’s basic factual basis, based on the executory exemplification of the Seoul East Eastern District Court Decision 2013Gahap101621 Decided July 24, 2013, the Defendant’s motion for a movable auction as Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2014No4756 Decided October 15, 2014, the fact that the movable property in the attached list in Guro-gu Seoul, Guro-gu, Seoul, which is the domicile of B, was seized on October 22, 2014 can be recognized by adding the entire purport of the pleadings to the written evidence No. 3, No. 1, and No. 2.
2. Issues and the issues of this case are whether movable property from Nos. 2 to 5, and Nos. 9 to 12, for which the Plaintiff seeks to refuse compulsory execution, is owned by the Plaintiff.
In addition to the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement or image from No. 1 to No. 12, the plaintiff is residing in the building with D, a mother, by leasing 3 buildings on the ground of Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from Sep. 20, 2005 to E, and the movable property listed in No. 2, No. 11, and No. 12 are transferred from the divorced parent, and the movable property listed in No. 4 and No. 5 of the attached Table are directly purchased by the plaintiff, and all of the movable property owned by the plaintiff can be sufficiently recognized.
However, there is insufficient evidence to view that movable property listed in the separate sheet Nos. 3, 9, and 10 is owned by the Plaintiff due to the conflict between the Plaintiff’s assertion (see, e.g., Paragraph 1 of the preparatory document as of April 7, 2015) and the Plaintiff’s mother’s written statement (Evidence A7).
Therefore, among the plaintiff's assertion, the part concerning movable property in the attached list Nos. 2, 4, 5, 11, and 12 shall be accepted, but the part concerning movable property in the attached list Nos. 3, 9, and 10 shall not be accepted.
3. Therefore, we accept part of the Plaintiff’s claim.