1. The defendant is based on the original of the payment order with executory power of the Seoul Central District Court No. 2017Hu386577 against B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 17, 2018, based on the original copy of the payment order stipulated in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition No. B against the Defendant’s order, the Defendant executed a seizure execution of the instant corporeal movables listed in the attached Form No. 2, 303 (hereinafter “instant corporeal movables”).

(hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”). B.

The instant corporeal movables were used by the Plaintiff from the past, and the Plaintiff completed a move-in report at the domicile of the Plaintiff on November 10, 2015, along with children, and resided around that time. B is in a marital relationship with Nonparty D, but is a person living together with the Plaintiff at the domicile of the said domicile.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to Article 190 of the Civil Execution Act, corporeal movables owned by the debtor as co-ownership of the debtor and his spouse or jointly possessed by the debtor's spouse may be seized pursuant to Article 189 of the same Act, and the above provision shall also apply mutatis mutandis to co-owned corporeal movables owned by the married couple having a de facto marital relationship (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da34273, Nov. 11, 1997). Meanwhile, de facto marriage refers to a marital relationship between the parties, even though they have the intention to marry between themselves and have a substance of marital life that can be recognized as a marital life in terms of family order in terms of social norms, and even if they did not report a marital relationship, which is a formal requirement, even though they did not report a

Therefore, in order to consider a de facto marriage as a de facto marriage, there is insufficient circumstance that there is a simple marital relationship or a sporadic marital relationship between the parties, and there should be a subjective intention of marriage between the parties, and objectively there should exist a substance of marital life that can recognize a marital life in terms of social order and order

Supreme Court Decision 94Meu1584 delivered on March 28, 1995 and Supreme Court Decision 9Meu1584 delivered on December 8, 1998.