1. The Defendant’s executory payment orders issued by the Suwon District Court in relation to B are the executory payment orders issued by the Suwon District Court Decision 2014Da13980.

1. The Plaintiff’s basic facts are the former wife B (Divorce around January 2007) and the fact that the Defendant, based on the title of execution against B as indicated in paragraph (1) of this Article, executed compulsory execution against corporeal movables listed in the attachment attachment attachment attached to B’s temporary domicile and the Plaintiff’s temporary domicile on March 17, 2015, based on the title of execution against B as indicated in paragraph (1) of this Article, is

2. The Plaintiff’s determination of the cause of the claim is the cause of the instant claim, and the corporeal movables listed in the Attached Attachment List, asserting that the Defendant is subject to compulsory execution based on the enforcement title against B, even though they were purchased by the Plaintiff, and sought non-permission of compulsory execution against corporeal movables listed in the Attached Attachment List.

According to Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff purchased a kimchi cooling 5, among the corporeal movables listed in the attached attachment list on August 30, 201, which was after the divorce with Eul on August 30, 2011. According to the above acknowledged facts, among the corporeal movables listed in the attached attachment list, the number 5 kimchi cooling is deemed to belong to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant's compulsory execution against No. 5 kimchi cooling among the corporeal movables listed in the attached attachment list should be denied.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff has the ownership or right of possession of the corporeal movables listed in the attached attachment list, as there is no evidence to prove that there is no evidence regarding the acquisition of the corporeal movables except for No. 5 Kimchi air conditioners, such as purchase receipts.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.