1. The original copy of the protocol of mediation with executory power of Suwon District Court 2013Kadan9439 against C.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant delegated the compulsory execution against C-owned corporeal movables on the ground of the executory exemplification of the protocol of mediation with executory power of the lending case (hereinafter “ executive title of this case”) to the office of the Suwon District Court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’s branch court’

B. Enforcement Officers D, which belong to the Jung-gu District Court, completed the attachment execution of the articles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant articles”) in the Gui-si E, 102 Dong 1208 (hereinafter “instant execution place”) by the Jung-gu District Court 2016No. 922 on March 19, 2015.

C. Among the instant objects, the items listed in the separate sheet 3, 5, 8, and 10 are items purchased by the Plaintiff with his own money and disposed of at the place of execution of the instant case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4-1 to 4, 6-3, 1 to 7-3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, it is reasonable to view each of the items listed in the separate sheet 3, 5, 8, and 10 as owned by the plaintiff. Therefore, compulsory execution against each of the above items is not allowed by the defendant based on the executive title of C.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that compulsory execution against each of the above items based on the executive title C is unfair, as the items listed in the attached list 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, and 11 are owned by the Plaintiff. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that each of the above items is owned by the Plaintiff.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is accepted within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.