1. No. 75 of the 2014, the Defendant’s notary public against C&C is a notarial deed with the executory power of No. 75 of the law firm.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a transfer of security agreement with respect to the transfer of ownership of corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet owned by the non-party partnership (hereinafter “the instant movable property”) by the non-party partnership and D, by means of an occupancy revision to the Plaintiff, in order to secure repayment of loan claims in KRW 80,000,000 to C. (hereinafter “non-party partnership”).

B. On the basis of the authentic copy of an executory deed No. 75, No. 75, 2014, the Defendant: (a) filed an application for compulsory execution with the Daejeon District Court 2015No. 5343, Dec. 17, 2015; and (b) executed seizure against the display stand 111, including the instant movable property (hereinafter “instant seizure execution”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

(a) If a security contract for a movable is concluded with respect to the movable property, and the mortgagee has received it by possession revision, even before completing the liquidation procedure, the mortgagee is not entitled to use and benefit from the collateral, but may exercise his right by asserting that he is the owner of the collateral in relation to a third party.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 93Da44739 delivered on August 26, 1994, and 2006Do4263 delivered on November 27, 2008, etc.). According to the facts of recognition under paragraph (1), the Plaintiff concluded a contract on the transfer of security for the instant movable property with the non-party union and received it by the method of possession revision. Thus, even if the Plaintiff, a mortgagee, did not use and benefit from the instant corporeal movable property, he/she may exercise his/her right against the Defendant as the owner of the instant corporeal movable property.

On the basis of an executory notarial deed against the non-party partnership, a compulsory execution against the movable of this case owned by the plaintiff who is not an executor shall not be permitted.

B. The defendant is against the non-party partnership.