logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원논산지원 2020.04.02 2019가단1483
제3자이의
Text

1. Each of the plaintiffs' claims is dismissed.

2. This Court shall regard the case of application for the suspension of compulsory execution of 2019 Chicago6.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant filed an application for the seizure of corporeal movables with the Daejeon District Court Seosan Branch E on the executory copy of the order for payment with the executory power of the transfer money case against Nonparty D (hereinafter “instant order for payment”).

B. On June 19, 2019, the enforcement officer of the said court executed the attachment (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”) of the objects indicated in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant attached objects”) on the third floor of the building located F (hereinafter “instant building”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiffs' assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion (1) purchased the third floor of the building of this case from G, and purchased corporeal movables, other than attached stuffs, Washingtons, and fish containers, and again leased this to the plaintiff B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "the plaintiff B") for the purchase and use of necessary goods after the lease contract. Thus, the seizure of this case is the execution of seizure against the plaintiffs' ownership, and the compulsory execution of this case under the premise of the ownership of the non-party D should be dismissed.

② There is no claim against Nonparty D.

B. Determination 11: (a) In the case where a third party has a right to prevent ownership or transfer of, or transfer of, the subject matter of execution, a lawsuit seeking the exclusion of enforcement by raising an objection to a compulsory execution that is in violation of the said right, the burden of proving that the subject matter of execution is owned by the Plaintiff Company or has the right to prevent transfer or transfer to the Plaintiff Company.

In this case, evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 1, 6, 5-1 through 6, 5-1, 5-2, 1, 2, 1, 3, 1, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5,

arrow