1. Attached Form C, on May 1, 2015, based on the original copy of the notarial deed No. 620, 2014, issued by the Defendant’s notary public office against C.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a creditor based on notarial deeds No. 620, 2014, No. 620, issued by a notary public office against C.

B. On May 1, 2015, the Defendant, based on the foregoing notarial deed, conducted compulsory execution and seized the articles listed in the separate sheet E (hereinafter “instant movable”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the reasoning of Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3 as to the cause of the claim and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that the Plaintiff received a decision to permit the sale of the movable property of this case in the procedure for compulsory auction of movable property of this Court on October 8, 2014 and paid the sale price in full on the same day.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the movable property of this case cannot be deemed as the liability property owned by C.

[Attachment, it is reasonable to see that the Plaintiff was owned by the Plaintiff in the instant material, but Plaintiff F also asserted ownership of the instant movable. Therefore, determination on whether to bona fide acquisition, etc. should be made through a separate suit.] Therefore, Defendant’s Diplomatic Office No. 620 of 2014 as to C is based on the authentic copy of notarial deed No. 620 of 2015, May 1, 2015.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.