1. The Defendant’s authentication to C is a cash loan agreement No. 288, No. 2016, No. 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and C’s relationship 1) is a person who operates a business that produces strings, attached houses, and dancing households with the trade name “E” in Asan City D. 2) The representative director F of the Plaintiff’s representative director was operating a joint plate manufacturing business with the trade name “G” on December 9, 2007, and supplied C with the joint plate from around 2009.

The F established the Plaintiff on November 16, 2012, the purpose of which is to carry on the wood and combined manufacturing business.

On November 30, 2012, the Plaintiff comprehensively acquired the business run by F.

Accordingly, F’s sales claim against F was transferred to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff continued to supply C with timber.

B. The Defendant’s compulsory execution 1) The Defendant and C, a creditor of C, request a notary public to prepare a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement with the purport that “C shall borrow KRW 20 million from the Defendant on May 31, 2016, with the maturity of payment specified as October 1, 2016, and immediately execute a compulsory execution when C fails to perform its obligation,” and the Defendant and C, as the said deed of the said legal entity on May 31, 2016, by requesting a notary public to prepare a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement with the said content as seen above (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

(2) On May 22, 2017, the Defendant seized the movables listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant movables”) in the “E” located in Asan City as its executive title on May 22, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 Each entry of evidence as referred to in subparagraphs 1 through 3, 8, 10, 12 through 30, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff purchased, from C, each of the movables listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter “instant movables”) from H, and acquired the ownership of each of the instant movables by taking over, from H, the movables listed in the separate sheet No. 3 (hereinafter “third movables”).

Therefore, the defendant, a creditor of C, is each of the movable property of this case owned by the plaintiff.