집행문부여에 대한 이의의 소
1. On the decision of this Court on a provisional disposition that prohibits the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff 2015Kahap146, this Court's decision.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On August 2014, four organizations, including D University Professors, D University Professors, D University D University Branch, and D University Total Students Association, etc. were to form a consultative body called “Emergency Support Committee” and to require the president’s retirement and normalization of school.
B. In the foregoing process of farming, the D University Professors occupied the second floor president room of the main building, which is part of the D University’s building. The D University’s total students association obstructed the main building from November 3, 2014 to December 18, 2014.
C. On May 15, 2015, the Defendant filed an application with the Cheongju District Court 2015Kahap146 against the Plaintiff, etc. for provisional disposition against the said four organizations, including the Plaintiff, the president of the D University Professors, and the executive departments thereof, and its members, including E, F, G, H, and I (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff, etc.”). On May 20, 2015, the instant court accepted the Defendant’s application partially and rendered a provisional disposition with the following main contents (hereinafter referred to as “instant provisional disposition order”). The instant provisional disposition order was served on the Plaintiff on May 20, 2015.
1. The plaintiff, etc. shall not engage in any act listed in the separate sheet of conduct within each building listed in the attached sheet of real estate.
3. In a case where the plaintiff et al. violates the order under paragraph (1), the debtors who committed the violation jointly and severally pay to the defendant KRW 3,000,000 per day of the violation.
The Defendant applied for grant of execution clause to the Cheongju District Court on the ground that the Plaintiff et al. violated the provisional disposition order of this case, and on June 8, 2015, the chief clerk C of the above court granted the Defendant “This original copy to the Defendant in order to enforce compulsory execution against the Plaintiff’s professors’ association, D University’s association, and D University’s association.”