beta
Text
1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
Law Firm D, 2009 No. 472, the defendant's notary public against C.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendant: (a) based on the executory exemplification of No. 472 of D’s 2009, the notary public against C performed compulsory execution (F) against the articles listed below; (b) on August 25, 2010, the Plaintiff was awarded a successful bid for the said articles.
B. On November 28, 2012, based on the authentic copy of a notarial deed (No. 472) executed by a notary public against C, the Defendant: (a) purchased the said articles from H on January 13, 2014, on the basis of the authentic copy of a notarial deed (No. 472) executed by a notary public against C; and (b) H purchased the said articles from H on December 12, 2013.
C. On May 25, 2018, the Defendant, based on the authentic copy of No. 472 of No. 472 of No. 19 of No. 472 of No. D, performed a compulsory execution (Gwanju District Court E) against the articles listed in the separate sheet.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 2 through 5, 12, 13 through 17, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The evidence revealed prior to each of the items listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 through 4 is the item, quantity, assessed value, place of storage, manufacturing date, etc. of each of the items indicated in the separate sheet, which can be known by comprehensively taking account of the results of the on-site inspection by this court and the overall purport of the pleadings, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff’s articles purchased from H on August 25, 2010, and Nos. 3 and 4 as the items purchased from H on January 13, 2014.
Therefore, the above articles are owned by the plaintiff, so compulsory execution is not allowed.
B. The Plaintiff is seeking the exclusion of compulsory execution against the articles listed in the separate sheet Nos. 5 through 11 among the articles listed in the separate sheet. However, the articles listed in No. 11 are the articles purchased by C itself. The remaining articles are recognized as owned by the Plaintiff only by the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff.