1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's primary claim among the lawsuits of this case shall be dismissed.

3. The plaintiff raised objection.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 16, 2015, the Defendant executed a provisional attachment against C’s corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant Doide”) located in the former, Gangnam-gun E ground storage (hereinafter “instant storage”) according to the original copy of the decision on provisional seizure of corporeal movables (2015Kadan34) (hereinafter “the instant provisional attachment order”).

B. On March 11, 2015, 2015, the instant Do Governor sold L at KRW 11,470,000 for the corporeal movables auction procedure in Gwangju District Court Decision 2015Ga4, and the instant Do Governor was delivered upon payment of the sales price. The execution officer affiliated with the Gwangju District Court branch deposited KRW 11,470,00 for the reason of the “after-sale of the sales price.”

C. Since then, the distribution procedure was commenced by the head of the Gwangju District Court for the 11,470,000 won for the instant land purchase, and the distribution court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes the amount to be actually distributed on January 9, 2017 to the Defendant as KRW 11,480,648 (=interest of KRW 11,470,00 for the purchase price - KRW 19,788 for the execution cost - KRW 9,140 for the execution cost - KRW 11,480 for the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, 20, 21, Eul evidence 8, the result of the commission of document forwarding to the Gwangju District Court for the interest of the head of Gwangju District Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine the legitimacy of the main claim part of the lawsuit of this case ex officio with respect to the legitimacy of the main claim part of the lawsuit of this case.

A. A lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is filed, or a lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is filed, after the completion of compulsory execution, inasmuch as a third party, who has ownership or right to restrain transfer or transfer of the object of compulsory execution, claims an objection against compulsory execution that is practically being carried out by infringing on its right, and seeks to exclude enforcement.