1. The conciliation protocol that the Defendant has executive force on the loan case No. 2011Gadan870, Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court against C.

1. The Defendant, indicating the claim, filed an application for compulsory execution with the competent court 2018No22 against each of the movables listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the movables of this case”) based on the executory exemplification of the instant protocol of mediation with Red Branch of the Daejeon District Court 201Gadan870, Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court 201. Accordingly, on January 24, 2018, the seizure of each of the movables of this case was executed.

However, each of the instant movables is a thing owned by the Plaintiff, and there is no reason to authorize compulsory execution with respect to the said movables as requested by the Defendant, and thus, Articles 48(1) and 48(Lawsuits by a third party) of the Civil Execution Act (1) of the same Act provides that if a third party claims that he/she has ownership on the subject matter of compulsory execution, or that he/she has a right to prevent the transfer or delivery of the subject matter, he/she may file a lawsuit of objection

Provided, That when the debtor contests an objection, he/she may make the debtor a co-defendant.

Pursuant to this case, the defendant is entitled to the exclusion of compulsory execution against each of the movables of this case.

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act);