1. On the basis of the executory exemplification of the judgment of the Gwangju District Court 2005Gaso256589 against Nonparty B, the Defendant rendered an executory exemplification of the judgment of the Supreme Court 2016.

1. On April 26, 2016, the Defendant’s basic facts, based on an executory exemplification of the judgment stated in the order, and subject to compulsory execution against the articles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant articles”), does not conflict between the parties.

2. The plaintiff's judgment as to the cause of claim of the plaintiff's assertion is owned by the plaintiff. Since compulsory execution against the article of this case is unlawful and impermissible, considering the purport of the plaintiff's testimony and pleading as to the article of this case, the plaintiff was the plaintiff's husband and wife, but the plaintiff was a plaintiff's husband and wife on December 30, 2003. The article of this case No. 1 among the article of this case was purchased directly around June 2013, around June 2012, the article of this case No. 9 was purchased by accompanying the article of this case No. 7. The article of this case purchased by the plaintiff before the confusion, and the remaining articles of this case were purchased by the plaintiff after the confusion, according to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff's claim of this case can be acknowledged as an unlawful execution since compulsory execution against the article of this case can not be allowed.

(3) If the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench. (4) If the photograph of the plaintiff at the time of execution did not dispute the facts at the place of execution, but the above recognition cannot be reversed due to such facts).