1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

The Defendant applied for a seizure of the corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet on August 16, 2019, based on the original copy of the judgment in the Changwon District Court case No. 2019Kadan102768 against C, and upon the said application, the execution officer of the Changwon District Court attached the said corporeal movables to D (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”) of the Changwon District Court on August 16, 2019 may either conflict between the parties or recognize it by taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings.

The plaintiff asserted that the corporeal movables listed in the attached list attached to the attached list are owned by the plaintiff and sought a non-permission of the compulsory execution of this case. Since the defendant withdrawn the above compulsory execution application, the lawsuit of this case is not beneficial to the lawsuit of this case.

The lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is unlawful in cases where a third party, who has ownership or right to prevent transfer or transfer of the object of compulsory execution, has asserted an objection against the compulsory execution that is practically being carried out by infringing on such right, and seek the exclusion of enforcement. Thus, in cases where a lawsuit by a third party is filed after the compulsory execution concerned is completed, or compulsory execution that existed at the time when the lawsuit by a third party is filed, is terminated while the lawsuit by a third party is pending, there is no interest in the lawsuit.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da49049 Decided October 10, 1997, etc.). However, the fact that the Defendant cancelled the compulsory execution of this case on December 13, 2019, which was after the filing of the instant lawsuit, does not conflict between the parties, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it has no interest in the lawsuit.

Therefore, the defendant's main defense is justified.

Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed.