The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 25, 2017, the Plaintiff married with C around 2004, but divorced on October 25, 2017.

B. On January 16, 2017, the Defendant and C drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement for security by means of transfer (No. 41, 2017, No. 2017, No. 41, No. 2017, No. 41, 2017, No. 2017, No. 2000) that “The Defendant lent KRW 930,00 to C, and C, for the purpose of securing the performance of the said obligation, C shall provide the Defendant with corporeal movables listed in the attached list, such as Gwangju building, the second floor, and furniture, as a means of possession and alteration.”

C. Based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant applied for a compulsory auction on the instant corporeal movables to the Gwangju District Court F.

On March 18, 2020, after the execution of the seizure of the instant corporeal movables was conducted, the auction date was conducted on March 18, 2020. The Defendant reported the purchase price of KRW 950,000, and the enforcement officer permitted the Defendant to sell the instant corporeal movables. The Defendant paid the proceeds by offsetting the above sale price and the claims based on the Notarial Deed, and the remainder of KRW 658,000, excluding the execution cost, was distributed to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant corporeal movables after divorce with C occupy the instant corporeal movables in a peaceful and open possession of them as their own possession. Thus, the Plaintiff is entitled to acquire the instant corporeal movables in good faith, as the Plaintiff directly uses and benefits from the instant corporeal movables, and thus, the Plaintiff is entitled to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s assertion to the effect that it is unreasonable to enforce the said corporeal movables due to his former spouse’s debt, and thus

3. The lawsuit of demurrer by a third party regarding the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case is subject to compulsory execution.