1. The conciliation protocol that the Defendant has the executive force of the damage compensation case No. 2015 money8022 against Nonparty C.

1. According to the facts without dispute over basic facts, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and Gap evidence Nos. 15-1 and 2-4, the defendant has a claim of KRW 30 million based on the executory copy of the mediation protocol of the case No. 2015 money8022 against non-party C, the plaintiff's husband, which is the plaintiff's husband, with the claim of KRW 30 million based on the executory copy of the mediation protocol of the case No. 2015, Aug. 24, 2016.

2. Determination

A. According to Article 190 of the Civil Execution Act, corporeal movables jointly possessed by the debtor and his/her spouse and possessed by the debtor or jointly possessed with his/her spouse may be seized pursuant to Article 189.

B. In light of the facts without dispute, Gap evidence 15-1 and Eul evidence 6-1 and 6-2, the plaintiff and non-party C are legally in a marital relationship, the plaintiff and non-party C had a marriage photograph of the plaintiff and non-party C in the plaintiff's house at the time of seizure execution, and the fact that the non-party C received mail on July 22, 2016 at the plaintiff's domicile.

However, in light of the following circumstances, the evidence Nos. 4, 5, 8, 10, 19, 20-2, 1, 22-1, 22-2, 27-1, 27-4, 1, and 28-1 and 2-2 of the evidence Nos. 4, 5, 8, 10, 19, 20-2 of the evidence Nos. 20, 27-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 28-2, the instant article cannot be deemed to be “corporeal movables possessed by Nonparty C with the co-ownership of Nonparty C and its spouse,

- The non-party C was in a separate place with the Plaintiff on April 2014, which was after the non-party C had been aware of the illegal relation with the Defendant, until now, and the resident registration was transferred from May 12, 2014 to another place.

Since then, Nonparty C filed a divorce lawsuit against the Plaintiff on two occasions and prohibited access.