1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

The defendant applied for the seizure of the articles listed in the attached list against B based on the executory exemplification of the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Da3688597, which held that the execution officer of the Suwon District Court attached the articles listed in the attached list to the Suwon District Court 2015Da6753 on October 1, 2015, there is no dispute between the parties.

The Plaintiff asserted that the goods listed in the attached list are owned by himself and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the said third party against the compulsory execution.

In a lawsuit of demurrer against the third party ex officio, since the third party, who has ownership or right to restrain transfer or transfer of the object of compulsory execution, raises an objection against the compulsory execution that is practically underway by infringing on its ownership or right, the lawsuit of demurrer against the third party is unlawful in the event that the compulsory execution in question is filed after the completion of the lawsuit, or compulsory execution that existed at the time when the lawsuit was filed by the third party is in progress (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da37176, Nov. 22, 1996). Since there is no dispute over the cancellation of seizure by requesting the release of attachment of the object listed in the separate sheet during the lawsuit in this case, the compulsory execution that existed at the time of the lawsuit in this case was completed during the course of the lawsuit, and thus, the lawsuit of this case by the plaintiff is unlawful.

Therefore, we decide to dismiss the lawsuit of this case and decide as per Disposition.