1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. With respect to cases where this Court applies for the suspension of compulsory execution 2015 Chicago38, February 17, 2015.

Basic Facts

A. The plaintiff and C are legal couple.

B. In the Daejeon District Court 2013Gahap980 (Main Office) and 2013Gahap1068 (Counterclaim), the said court rendered a ruling on September 17, 2014 that “C shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 200 million per annum from December 31, 2013 to September 17, 2014, 5% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment,” and the said ruling was finalized on October 7, 2014.

(hereinafter “final judgment of this case”). C.

On February 4, 2015, the enforcement officer affiliated with the Daejeon District Court Seosan Branch, who was entrusted with the execution by the Defendant, issued a seizure of each of the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet, based on the executory exemplification of the final judgment of this case, at D (road name address: F in the ground building E at the time of Seosan), based on the mutual food materials wholesale and retail store (hereinafter “instant store”).

(hereinafter “instant seizure enforcement” (hereinafter “instant seizure enforcement”). Inasmuch as there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 12, Eul evidence No. 3, and the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, which is inherited from the Plaintiff’s mother’s mother as funds for opening business, shall be registered as the Plaintiff’s business in the name of the Plaintiff on the ground of the D-based building at the time of sansan City, which is owned by the Plaintiff, and the store of this case is operated independently, each corporeal movables listed in No. 12 and No. 25 of the attached list (hereinafter

Therefore, the execution of the seizure of this case should not be permitted because it infringes on the plaintiff's ownership as a third party.

Judgment

(a) Any corporeal movables jointly possessed by the debtor and his spouse, or jointly possessed by the debtor and his spouse, shall be presumed to be jointly owned by the married couple (Article 830(2) of the Civil Act); and corporeal movables jointly possessed by the debtor and his spouse may be seized;

(Article 190 of the Civil Execution Act).

As to the instant case, the Health Council;