(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.11.12 2015가단20367

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.11.12 2015가단20367

제3자이의

Text

1. On June 2015, the Defendant based on the executory exemplification of the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2011Da241839, as to B.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in the entry of evidence A No. 1, by integrating the purport of the entire pleadings:

The defendant applied for compulsory execution of corporeal movables based on the authentic copy of the judgment of this case against B.

B. On June 9, 2015, the enforcement officer of the Daejeon District Court attached the seizure of corporeal movables to each of the articles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant articles Nos. 1 through 12”) in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon, 101 Dong 301, where the Plaintiff and B together reside (hereinafter “instant articles”).

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is in a de facto marital relationship with B from October 2013 to the date of the first pleading, but the Plaintiff has been divorced from D and D around April 2008 on the date of the first pleading, and was stated in a de facto marital relationship with B from around 2013 to the date of the first pleading. However, the written complaint submitted by the Plaintiff states that the Plaintiff had lived with B from 20 months before the instant lawsuit was filed, and in full view of the overall purport of other pleadings, it is reasonable to view that the period of de facto marital relationship with B as the Plaintiff is up to the date from October 2013.

Since all articles of this case 1 to 12 are owned independently by the plaintiff, compulsory execution based on the premise that these articles are owned by B should not be allowed.

B. As a matter of principle, in a marital life, the property acquired by one of the married couple in his/her own revenue and name shall be deemed to be the sole ownership of the property acquired by one of the married couple with the special property. However, the property not so clear who belongs to any of the married couple is presumed to be the joint ownership of the married couple. Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 190 of the Civil Execution Act, corporeal movables jointly owned by the debtor and his/her spouse, which are possessed by the debtor or jointly possessed by the spouse may be seized pursuant to

In addition, the above provision has the substance of marital life and does not report marriage only.

참조조문

-민사집행법 제190조

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.10.25 2016가단21571

-수원지방법원 2016.05.27 2015나24444

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.14 2017가단5189921

-서울북부지방법원 2019.05.17 2018가단24957

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2014.12.23 2014가단8072