1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. On July 30, 2019, the Defendant executed a seizure of corporeal movables on the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant corporeal movables”) as shown in D of the same court on July 30, 2019, based on the judgment of the land delivery case against C by the Military Court of Chuncheon District Court of 2017Kadan3182.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion and determination that the instant corporeal movables are leased to C by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the designated parties, who do not own C, respectively. Thus, the Defendant’s execution of seizure on the instant corporeal movables based on the executive title against C is not permissible.

However, in the lawsuit by a third party, the burden of proving that the pertinent corporeal movables owned by the Plaintiff is owned by the Plaintiff and the designated parties is insufficient to recognize that the instant corporeal movables owned by the Plaintiff and the third party, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.