According to the records, a special appellant filed a lawsuit against the applicant for provisional disposition of this case with the Gwangju District Court (87Gadan3790 case), and the special appellant filed a lawsuit against the applicant for provisional disposition of this case, and the special appellant purchased from the applicant for provisional disposition 129 square meters wide and 129 square meters wide and the entire above ground buildings, and completed the purchase price, and thus, the judgment of winning the claim of the applicant for provisional disposition among the buildings listed in the attached list attached to the judgment of this case, which is owned by the applicant for provisional disposition, and the special appellant who filed a lawsuit against the applicant for provisional disposition, filed a lawsuit against the applicant for provisional disposition, but the judgment of dismissing the appeal became final and conclusive. Thus, since the remaining buildings were still owned by the applicant for provisional disposition of this case, and the special appellant filed a request for provisional disposition of this case with the purport that the provisional disposition of this case did not request a suspension of the claim against the applicant for provisional disposition of this case until the provisional appellant filed a claim for compulsory execution of this case pursuant to the Civil Procedure Act (the judgment of this case 90507).

However, in a case where an objection is raised, the court shall recognize that the grounds for alleging the objection are legally well-grounded in order to order the suspension of compulsory execution pursuant to Article 507(2) of the Civil Procedure Act in order to issue an order to suspend compulsory execution, and in a lawsuit for raising the objection, the grounds for raising the objection are limited to that arising after the closing of argument. Thus, if the grounds for raising the objection in the lawsuit for raising the objection are not the grounds arising after the closing of argument in the final and conclusive judgment, it shall not be deemed a case where there is a legal reason as stipulated in Article 507(2) of the above Act. Thus, as long as the grounds for raising the objection in the lawsuit for raising the objection is obvious by the complaint itself that the grounds for raising the objection is that occurred before the closing of argument in the lawsuit for raising the objection, the above application for the suspension of compulsory execution is illegal, but the court below accepted it and ordered the provisional disposition as above, which affected the judgment,

Therefore, the order of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the court below for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice) Lee Chang-soo Kim Jong-won