1. The defendant is based on the executory exemplification of the payment order (Seoul Eastern District Court 2015J24046) against B.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and Eul evidence No. 1, the defendant seized attached movables listed in the attached seizure list (hereinafter "the movable of this case") on October 20, 2015 based on the executory exemplification of the Seoul East East District Court 2015Hu24046 (hereinafter "the payment order of this case") with respect to Eul on October 20, 2015. The defendant's successor acquired the claim based on the decision of the payment order of this case from the defendant on May 20, 2016 and notified Eul thereof on May 23, 2016. However, the movable of this case can be recognized that it is the goods purchased by the plaintiff by using credit cards, etc. in its name around 2010.

According to the above facts, a compulsory execution against the movables of this case based on the original copy of the payment order against B shall be dismissed as against the movables owned by the plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified and accepted.