1. On the basis of the executory exemplification of the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2019 Ghana23357 rendered by the Defendant with respect to C, the Seoul Western District Court on November 2019.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as indicated in Gap evidence Nos. 8 through 12, the defendant applied for the seizure of corporeal movables based on the executory exemplification of the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2019Gaso2357 Decided November 26, 2019, and seized corporeal movables to the Seoul Southern District Court E on November 26, 2019, and each movable property listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, and 9 (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s movable property”) can be acknowledged as being owned by the plaintiffs purchased by the plaintiffs or being kept in custody for a third party.

Therefore, compulsory execution against the movables owned by the plaintiffs should not be permitted.

Attached Form

Among each of the movables listed in the list, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the remaining movables except the movables owned by the plaintiffs are unique properties of the plaintiffs, or the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize it. Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim that the defendant's compulsory execution should not be dismissed is rejected.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.