beta
Text
1. On May 2018, the Defendant, based on the original copy of the payment order in the Suwon District Court 2018Hu251 case for D.
Reasons
Basic Facts
A. Plaintiff A is the wife of Plaintiff D, and Plaintiff B and C are children between Plaintiff A and D.
B. On January 11, 2018, the Defendant filed a payment order against D with the Suwon District Court for a claim for the return of the loan as the Suwon District Court Branch Branch 2018 tea251, and received a payment order against D, “D shall pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 27,186,196, and any delay damages for the amount of KRW 25 million.”
The above payment order was finalized on March 13, 2018.
C. On May 14, 2018, the Defendant seized each movable property listed in the separate sheet based on the original copy of the above payment order.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 13, and each movable set forth in the list Nos. 6, 11, and 12 of the plaintiffs' assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings are owned by the plaintiff A, each movable set out in the attached list Nos. 4, 7, 8, and 9 is owned by the plaintiff B, and each movable set out in the attached list Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 is owned by the plaintiff C.
However, the defendant, based on the executive title of D, sought the exclusion of the execution because of the execution of seizure of each of the above movables.
Judgment
1) Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 7-1, 2, and 17, Plaintiff B purchased the movable property listed in the separate sheet No. 4 (Not North Korea) on June 28, 2016 with its own funds. Considering the general purpose of use and use of the Not North Korea, it is reasonable to deem that the aforementioned movable property is owned by Plaintiff B. (2) comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the written evidence Nos. 6, 8-1, 2, and 14, E may purchase the movable property listed in the separate sheet No. 3 (sports) around December 11, 2014, and around February 11, 2018, and then recognize the fact that the movable property listed in the separate sheet No. 5 (sports organization) in the separate sheet No. 3 (sports organization) was sold to Plaintiff C with its own funds.
According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to deem that each of the above movables is owned by Plaintiff C.
3. Accordingly, the defendant's order for payment against D is based on the original copy of the order for payment of D.