beta
Text
1. The Defendant, on November 25, 2014, has the power to execute the protocol of mediation (2014 Ghana) No. 121099 against Nonparty C.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 25, 2014, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for a loan claim against C, the Plaintiff’s spouse, as this Court Decision 2014 Ghana121099, and the conciliation was concluded to the effect that C would pay KRW 7 million to the Defendant.
(hereinafter “instant conciliation”). B.
Based on the instant conciliation protocol, on August 9, 2016, the Defendant enforced compulsory execution on movable property in attached Form 1 in this Court No. 2016No. 3617.
(See Evidence A 3) . [Grounds for recognition] The parties to a dispute, entry of Evidence A 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the movable property listed in attached Form 1 is owned by the Plaintiff.
According to Article 830 (2) of the Civil Code, a property whose marital identity is unclear shall be presumed to be the co-ownership of the married couple. However, according to Article 830 (1) of the Civil Code, the property acquired in the name of the married couple shall be the unique property
According to the facts that there is no dispute between the parties, the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff purchased the movables Nos. 8, 14 from among the movables listed in attached Table Nos. 1 on March 9, 2016 with his/her card. The fact that the plaintiff was awarded a successful bid of the movables listed in attached Table 2 in the compulsory execution procedure for corporeal movables listed in attached Table No. 2009No. 8320 (see evidence No. 1) is recognized respectively, and the movables No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 11, and 12 from among the movables listed in attached Table No. 1 are the same as the movables listed in attached Table No. 2 that the plaintiff was awarded in the compulsory execution procedure for corporeal movables listed in attached Table 209.
However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the remaining movables except the movables recognized above are owned by the plaintiff among the movables listed in attached Table 1.
B. Therefore, based on the executory exemplification of the instant conciliation protocol against Nonparty C, the Defendant’s movable property as indicated in [Attachment 1] Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 14 on August 25, 2016 based on the executory exemplification of the instant conciliation protocol against Nonparty C.