1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 4, 2015, the Defendant, based on the instant payment order against the debtor C, executed a seizure of the instant corporeal movables under this Court No. 2015No909 (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”).

B. Meanwhile, as C’s front wife, the Plaintiff occupied the instant corporeal movables at the time of the instant compulsory execution.

(Grounds for recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that, while borrowing money from D on May 8, 2009, the Plaintiff established a collateral security right for the instant corporeal movables, and as long as the Plaintiff did not repay the said money, the said corporeal movables are owned by D, execution of the instant corporeal movables ought to be denied.

B. The ground of objection in a lawsuit of demurrer against the third party’s judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion, that is, the burden of proving that the instant corporeal movables subject to compulsory execution of the instant case are owned by the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff.

However, the plaintiff is the plaintiff's own assertion that the corporeal movables in this case are owned by D, not the plaintiff, and even if the above claim of the plaintiff is asserted by the plaintiff that the above corporeal movables are owned by the plaintiff, it is not sufficient to recognize that the above corporeal movables are owned by the plaintiff merely by the statement of the evidence Nos. 2, 5, and 6, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Accordingly, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.