1. The Defendant’s notary public against C is the authentic copy of a notarial deed with the executory power of No. 370, 2016.

1. Examining the reasoning of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7 as to the cause of the claim, as a result of the order to submit tax information on this court's sub-tax office, and the witness E's testimony, the Plaintiff: (a) on January 13, 2016, the Plaintiff leased the first floor and underground of the building F in Seocheon-si with the lease deposit for the lease deposit of KRW 60 million, monthly rent of KRW 300,000,000; and (b) on February 25, 2017; (c) on the above real estate with the trade name of "G" (hereinafter referred to as "the instant marina"); (d) around February 20, 2016, the Plaintiff subleted the above Macop part, which is part of the above Maco to C with the Plaintiff's consent; and (d) on June 20, 2016, the Defendant, after deducting the Plaintiff's ownership of each of the instant movable property from the list No. 27 (hereinafter referred to "the instant movable property").

According to the above facts, since the article in this case was owned by E at the time of the compulsory execution of this case, the defendant's compulsory execution of this case under the premise that the above article is owned by C shall not be permitted.

2. The defendant's assertion regarding the defendant is alleged to have owned C at the time of the compulsory execution of this case, but as seen earlier, C was merely the sub-lessee of the Mawp part of this case, and the above argument is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.