beta
Text
The judgment of the first instance court is modified as follows. A.
The defendant ordered Daejeon District Court on April 25, 2019.
Reasons
1. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 13 as well as the arguments, the plaintiff is the legal spouse of the plaintiff who reported a marriage on or around April 2013. The defendant may recognize the fact that the execution of seizure (hereinafter referred to as the "execution of the seizure of this case") is completed with respect to each of the movables listed in the separate sheet in the Daejeon District Court P on August 27, 2019, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment of the Daejeon District Court 2019Kadan3230 transfer money case against C and the execution officer on the basis of the executory exemplification of the judgment of the Daejeon District Court 201Gadan3230 transfer money.
2. The plaintiff asserts that the execution of the seizure of this case against each of the movables of this case should be denied for the following reasons.
All of the movables of this case are things that the plaintiff purchased at the plaintiff's expense or received gifts from the plaintiff's friendship consciousness, and are not jointly owned by the plaintiff and C, but owned by the plaintiff alone.
B. C was living together with the Plaintiff within the apartment of this case until the end of 2017 only from the end of the end of 2017, and thereafter, C was living in another place and living separately with the Plaintiff. Each of the instant movable property within the apartment of this case is owned by only the Plaintiff, and C does not occupy it.
C. Even if each of the instant movables is jointly owned or jointly possessed by the Plaintiff and C, it constitutes a household or a daily necessities required for the life determined by Article 195 subparag. 1 of the Civil Execution Act as a thing prohibited from seizure.
3. Determination
A. The property of which judgment on the ground that the Plaintiff solely owned or occupied each of the instant movable property is not clear who belongs to either of the married couple’s legal principles is jointly owned by the married couple.