1. The defendant has the executive force of the judgment of Suwon District Court 2006Kadan109489 decided June 28, 2007 against Nonparty C.

1. Based on the original copy of the judgment of the Suwon District Court Decision 2006Kadan109489 Decided June 28, 2007, the fact that the Defendant executed the seizure of corporeal movables under the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2015No4028 on September 17, 2015 as to movables in the attached list, which were listed in the attached list D and 113 Dong 901, and attached list, as Seoul Northern District Court 2015No4028, is no dispute between the parties.

2. According to the purport of the entire argument among the images of Gap evidence No. 3 as to the cause of the claim, in light of the overall purport of the argument, each of the movables listed in the attached list No. 1 through No. 4 between April 4, 2010 and October 2, 2012 can be acknowledged that the plaintiff purchased each of the movables listed in the attached list No. 1 through No. 4 between April 4, 2010 and October 2, 2012. In addition, the following circumstances recognized by the purport of the entire argument are as follows: (a) the plaintiff appears to have resided together with his wife and his/her children while supporting the mother C and his/her father E at the current execution place; and (b) the movables listed in the attached list No. 6 in the attached list No. 88

Therefore, the compulsory execution against each movable mentioned in the attached attachment list is illegal because it is against the property owned by a person who is not the debtor, so the compulsory execution should not be allowed.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.