1. The Defendant’s notary public against C is based on the notarial deed No. 351 of the e-mail General Law Office (No. 351).

The Defendant applied for compulsory execution against the movables listed in the separate sheet as Seoul Central District Court 2013Hun-Ma5121, based on the enforcement title against the obligor C, and the facts that the movables listed in the separate sheet were sold to Nonparty D during the execution procedure (a total of KRW 3 million difference), the Plaintiff, who is the seat of C, purchased the said movables from Nonparty D and made them used, and the fact that the Defendant applied for compulsory execution against the movables listed in the separate sheet, based on the enforcement title against the sub-party C, and the enforcement procedure commenced, is either disputed between the parties or recognized by the purport of the entire pleadings.

Then, although movable properties listed in the separate sheet are used by C, they are owned by the plaintiff not by C but by the debtor. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion seeking non-execution of the attached list is justified.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is accepted on the ground of the reasons.