1. The Defendant’s executory exemplification of the payment order issued by the Seoul Central District Court 2015 tea 31999 against Nonparty B.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the plaintiff can recognize the purchase of goods listed in the attached attachment list from February 6, 2011 to February 24, 2015.

Therefore, since the articles listed in the attachment list are owned by the plaintiff, the execution of the attachment of the case at this court 2015No1795, which was made on May 7, 2015 for the above articles should be denied. The plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.