1. No. 3926, a notarial deed drawn up by the defendant's notary public against B, as one of law firms.

1. Basic facts

A. On the basis of the authentic copy of a notarial deed with executory power of No. 3926, No. 3926, 2013, the Defendant: (a) filed an application for execution of the seizure of corporeal movables with the Suwon District Court 2014No. 365; and (b) on February 4, 2014, the execution officer of the Suwon District Court seized, as the residence of C, the movables indicated in the attached list, which were located within the execution place of the execution of the seizure of corporeal movables (hereinafter “the instant house”).

(hereinafter “instant seizure execution”). B.

On November 16, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement on the instant housing, and the Plaintiff is residing together with E in the instant housing.

C. Meanwhile, as the Plaintiff’s friendship, B is residing in the instant house from December 6, 2012.

[Ground for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 each entry (including numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged prior to the determination on the cause of the claim and the evidence submitted, namely, ① the Plaintiff submitted a receipt for purchase of the movable property (TV) listed in the separate sheet No. 5, and the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have owned all 2 television sets in the instant house among the seized movable property, and ② the movable property listed in the separate sheet No. 2 is a laundry, and the Plaintiff’s children live in the Plaintiff’s family members, including the Plaintiff, after they leased the instant house, and thereafter they live in the Plaintiff’s family members, it is reasonable to deem that the said movable is an object used by the Plaintiff’s family members prior to the Plaintiff’s living together, and ③ the movable property listed in the separate sheet No. 3 and No. 5 is recognized as the Plaintiff’s ownership.