1. On the basis of the executory exemplification of the original of the payment order issued by the Daejeon District Court 2018 teas. 19345 against D, the Defendant is subject to the executory exemplification of the original of the payment order.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against D (her husband) for credit card payment claim under the Daejeon District Court Decision 2018 tea19345, and issued a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) from the above court stating that “D shall pay KRW 12,746,720 and its delay damages.” Since D did not raise any objection, the instant payment order became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On January 10, 2019, upon the instant payment order, the Defendant seized the goods listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant goods”) in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon, E apartment, and F, the domicile of the Plaintiff and D.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application with this Court for the suspension of compulsory execution against the instant goods under this Court 2019 Chicago15, and received a decision to suspend compulsory execution on January 18, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff's assertion was that TV Nos. 1 and 6 among the goods in this case was acquired in the name of the plaintiff, and the goods Nos. 4, 7, and 8 were purchased by mixed water around 1990 and seized due to the plaintiff's debt, and the plaintiff, the spouse of the plaintiff in the Daejeon District Court G movables auction procedure, acquired by exercising the preferential right. The articles Nos. 3 and 5, which were donated by the plaintiff to China around 2004, are the goods owned by the plaintiff and therefore compulsory execution should not be permitted.

3. Determination

A. The corporeal movables owned by the debtor or possessed by the spouse as a co-ownership of the debtor and his spouse under the relevant legal principles may be seized (Article 190 of the Civil Execution Act). The proprietary properties owned by one of the married couple prior to marriage and the properties acquired in his/her own name during the marriage shall be deemed the special property, and the property whose belongs to anyone of the married couple is not clear shall

(Article 830, Section 1, 2). (b) of the Civil Act

Whether the instant article is the Plaintiff’s unique property or not, Gap evidence 6 and 7 respectively.