1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On April 27, 2016, based on the executory exemplification of the order of payment order No. 2016, No. 516 of this Court against B, the Defendant filed an objection against compulsory execution against B on April 27, 2016 with respect to the property listed in the separate sheet, which was not owned by B, and against the Plaintiff’s lawsuit seeking non-performance of compulsory execution on the ground that the said property is owned by the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s defense that the compulsory execution had already been completed due to the termination of the sale and distribution procedure of movable property, and that there is no interest in the lawsuit of this case. Thus, the third party’s lawsuit is a lawsuit seeking an objection against compulsory execution that is being practically underway by infringing upon the rights of a third party, and thus, it is unlawful for the Defendant to have no interest in the lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da16340, Oct. 10, 197; 205Da1654, etc.).

Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

The Plaintiff asserted that, around March 29, 2016, the mother C purchased the movable property listed in the separate sheet, which was located in the above apartment, from the mother C around March 29, 2016. However, the Plaintiff failed to submit objective evidence related to the sale and purchase. However, it was difficult to accept the above assertion in light of the fact that the auction procedure was in progress (the sale date was involved in C) without any particular problem.