1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

No. 1909, the defendant's certificate of notary public against C, No. 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. E and C are married couple;

The plaintiff is a creditor against E, and the defendant is a creditor against C.

B. On February 20, 2014 and November 30, 2013, the Plaintiff and E drafted a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement for transfer security (No. 263, 2014, a notary public) with the content that the Plaintiff will provide an object, etc. recorded in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant object”) as a transfer security by means of occupancy or amendment in order to reimburse the Plaintiff on February 28, 2014 and secure its performance.

C. On February 18, 2014, prior to the preparation of the notarial deed as stated in the foregoing sub-paragraph (b), C drafted a letter of recognition that “E permits the Plaintiff to provide all corporeal movables within the C and E’s residential premises as security for transfer.”

On September 22, 2015, the Defendant attached the instant article on September 22, 2015, with the deed No. 1909, No. 1909, issued by a notary public against C as an executive title.

(S) Daegu District Court Branch 2015No. 1062, hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”). 【No dispute exists as a ground for recognition, entry in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that all of the goods of this case were provided as security for transfer and legitimate owner, so the defendant's compulsory execution of this case shall not be permitted.

B. Since compulsory execution was conducted several years prior to the Defendant’s assertion on the instant goods, C’s preferential purchase was made, the instant goods are owned by C.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, who entered into a transfer security agreement with E, other than the owner of the instant goods, cannot acquire the transfer security right.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the Plaintiff’s ownership of the instant article 1) No. 1 as at the time of the acquisition of the Plaintiff’s transfer security right and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Daegu District Court Branching the obligee F’s notarial deed (No. 869 of No. 2010 as an executive title) against the obligor E as an obligor.