beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s executory exemplification of the Suwon District Court Decision 2019Gadan29217 Decided April 28, 2020 with respect to C.
Reasons
1. The following facts of recognition are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the respective entries in Gap evidence 1 to 9 and the purport of all pleadings:
On May 16, 2017, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on November 18, 2014, and resides in the instant apartment from around that time.
B. The Plaintiff’s mother, F and C (F reported marriage with C on November 24, 2008), whose spouse is the Plaintiff’s mother, are making a move-in report as a household member on May 30, 2017 to the instant apartment in which the Plaintiff resides as the head of the household.
C. On July 1, 2020, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment rendered by the Suwon District Court Decision 2019Da29217 Decided April 28, 2020 against the Defendant C, the seizure of corporeal movables (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”) was conducted on each object indicated in the attached attachment list, which was in the instant apartment.
On the other hand, on March 24, 2017, the Plaintiff purchased TV as indicated in [Attachment 1] No. 1, on March 13, 2017; on March 13, 2017; and on April 12, 2017, laund Nos. 5 in the same list.
Attached Form
The coolant No. 2 stated in the attachment list No. 2 was sold in the instant apartment on February 15, 2015, and the Plaintiff paid the purchase price with the leased goods of which the Plaintiff selected additional construction on February 15, 2015. The TV indicated in the same list No. 10 is the goods used by the Plaintiff in the instant apartment unit after the purchase by the Plaintiff.
2. According to the above facts of the judgment, each of the items listed in the annexed attachment Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 is owned by a third party, not by a debtor (C) and are subject to compulsory execution of this case, which infringes on the rights of the plaintiff and thus, it shall be dismissed.
3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.