The plaintiff's lawsuit against defendant D Co., Ltd. is dismissed.

2. The representative meeting of Defendant B apartment occupants against E and F.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 12, 2020, the Plaintiff purchased each of the of the instant goods and paid the price in full in cases of compulsory enforcement against movable property with corporeal movables, G, H (Concurrent) and I (Concurrent), and then lent it to E again.

B. Accordingly, on the basis of the authentic copy of the payment order issued on October 22, 2019, the Council of Representatives of Residents of Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Representative Council”) rendered attachment enforcement on each of the instant objects to the District Court J of the Government District Court on July 30, 2020, on October 22, 2019, on the basis of the authentic copy of the payment order issued on October 22, 2019.

(c)

In addition, on July 30, 2020, the defendant company also executed attachment of each of the goods of this case to Jung Government District Court K on the basis of the original copy of the payment order before July 26, 2019, which was 2019, before July 26, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy or Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 5 and the purport of the whole theory

2. Prior to the judgment on the legitimacy of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendant Company, the Plaintiff sought exclusion of compulsory execution against each of the instant items based on the F’s executive title on the ground that each of the instant items was the Plaintiff’s lawsuit. However, a third party’s lawsuit of demurrer is seeking an objection against compulsory execution against which a third party who has the right to restrain ownership or transfer or transfer of the subject matter of compulsory execution infringes on his/her right and is actually underway, and seek exclusion of enforcement. As such, in a case where a third party’s lawsuit is filed after the completion of compulsory execution or compulsory execution against a third party’s lawsuit is pending during the lawsuit, there is no benefit of lawsuit, and the effect of seizure is extinguished upon withdrawal of a third party’s request for auction, and the auction procedure is completed as a matter of course (Article 93(1) of the Civil Execution Act). However, a third party’s lawsuit was pending at the time of filing a lawsuit of objection, but a request for compulsory execution is pending during the lawsuit.