1. The defendant shall collect from the plaintiff the movable property listed in the separate sheet No. 1 as stated in the separate sheet No. 2.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 list (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

On July 2014, the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) at KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 7150,000 (including value-added tax).

B. On March 12, 2015, the Defendant lent KRW 20 million to C on September 11, 2015, the due date for payment was determined and lent to C, and C transferred the ownership of the movable property in attached Form 2, which was owned by C (hereinafter “instant movable property”) to the Defendant by means of an alteration of possession for the purpose of securing the performance of the said loan obligation.

C. Upon delay in the payment of rent, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C for requesting the delivery of a building with the Seoul Central District Court 2017Gahap581925, and on April 12, 2018, “C delivers the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and pays the money calculated at the rate of KRW 7,150,000 per month from January 19, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the instant real estate” was awarded a favorable judgment of the Plaintiff, and the said judgment (hereinafter “final judgment of this case”) became final and conclusive on May 22, 2018.

On the other hand, C commenced rehabilitation procedures on August 19, 2016, and the rehabilitation plan was authorized on March 13, 2017 (Cheongju District Court 2016 Gohap5001), but the rehabilitation procedure was abolished on November 14, 2018, and C was declared bankrupt on December 14, 2018 (Cheongju District Court 2018Hau5).

E. On April 11, 2016, the Defendant applied for the seizure and auction of corporeal movables related to the instant movables to the Cheongju District Court D, but a compulsory execution was suspended upon C’s application for rehabilitation. On January 18, 2019, the Defendant applied for the additional seizure of the instant movables to the Cheongju District Court D.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 4, 8, 10, 17 through 19, 30, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendant is an external owner as a mortgagee of the instant movable property, but is the Plaintiff.