1. The Defendant’s executory exemplification of the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2016Na37455 against C agricultural partnership.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the entries and videos of Gap evidence 2 through 4, and evidence 7 through 20 as well as the purport of the whole pleadings.

On April 25, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a facility lease agreement with C Farming Association Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Corporation”) on the goods listed in the [Attachment List owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant goods”) and delivered the instant goods to the Nonparty Corporation.

B. On September 4, 2018, the Defendant filed an application for compulsory execution stipulated in Paragraph (1) based on the executory exemplification of the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2016Na37455 against the non-party corporation. On September 4, 2018, the execution officer of Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court filed an application for compulsory execution against the non-party corporation, and the execution officer of the seizure of corporeal movables against the instant goods in Chungcheongnam-gun,

2. According to the above facts of recognition, since the owner of the instant article is the Plaintiff, compulsory execution based on the judgment by the Defendant is unlawful on the premise that the instant article is owned by the non-party corporation.

Therefore, the defendant's compulsory execution against the goods of this case shall be improper and shall not be permitted.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.