1. The defendant's execution of the case, including the Suwon District Court, Osan District Court, 2018 tea, 6946 (money).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 5, 2018, the Plaintiff purchased each of the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant movables”) from C (hereinafter referred to as “C”) in the purchase price of KRW 2,4750,000 (excluding value-added tax) and paid the said purchase price.

B. On the same day, the Plaintiff leased the instant movable property to C during the lease period from February 5, 2018 to February 10, 2021. On February 9, 2018, the Plaintiff drafted a notarial deed as to the said lease agreement with C.

C. Meanwhile, on December 20, 2018, based on the executory payment order of the case, the Defendant, including the instant movable property, issued a seizure execution on the movable property in the business place of Suwon District Court No. 2018No3597, 2018, on December 20, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, significant facts in this court and purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Plaintiff purchased the instant movable property from C on February 5, 2018, and thereafter leased the instant movable property to C after full payment of the purchase price, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant movable property by means of an occupancy revision around February 5, 2018.

Therefore, the Defendant’s compulsory execution against the movable property of this case based on the claim against C should be denied.

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