1. The defendant is based on C’s executory exemplification of the judgment in Seoul Eastern District Court 2010Kadan48302.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 20, 2018, the Defendant seized each movable property listed in the separate sheet, Da apartment and E (hereinafter “instant movable property”) on the basis of the original judgment of the Seoul Eastern District Court 2010Kadan48302 case, which is the Plaintiff’s residence, on November 20, 2018.

(hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”). B.

On November 10, 2005, the Plaintiff and the Defendant C were legally married couple who reported marriage, and were living in the Plaintiff’s residence, and reported divorce around February 22, 2019.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 3, and 6, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the instant movable owned by the Plaintiff, and thus, the instant compulsory execution is unlawful. 2) The instant movable was purchased by the Plaintiff based on the ordinary right of attorney during the marital life of the Plaintiff and C, and constitutes a common property of the husband and wife, and the instant compulsory execution is lawful.

B. The property that one spouse of the related legal principles has prior to marriage and the property that one spouse acquired under his/her own name during marriage shall be the unique property.

(Article 830(1) of the Civil Act provides, however, that a property whose marital identity is unclear shall be presumed to be co-ownership by the husband and wife (Article 830(2) of the Civil Act), and that corporeal movables possessed by the debtor or jointly possessed by the spouse as co-ownership by the debtor and his spouse may be seized.

(Article 190 of the Civil Execution Act).

1) Determination as to the cause of the claim 1) Domins, Gap 2, 11, and 12 evidence (as a whole, comprehensively taking account of the purport of the arguments and arguments in each description, the movables listed in the separate sheet 1 are purchased with the plaintiff's mother F credit card around April 29, 2018, and the movables listed in Nos. 4 and 5 are purchased with the plaintiff's credit card around February 17, 2018. The movables described in Nos. 6 are purchased with the above F credit card around February 8, 2018. The movables described in Nos. 3, 8, and 10 are purchased with the above F credit card around February 2, 2018, and the movables described in Nos. 3, 8, and 10 are the Plaintiff's money.