[2] In a case where the court of appeal did not indicate that the appeal is a special appeal while submitting a petition of appeal against a judgment that only the special appeal is permitted, and where the court of appeal did not indicate that it is the Supreme Court, the court of acceptance of the

Article 15(1) of the Civil Execution Act provides that an immediate appeal may be filed against a judgment by the court of execution on the execution procedure only where special provisions exist. Article 17(1) of the same Act provides that an immediate appeal may be filed against a decision to revoke the execution procedure, a decision to dismiss or dismiss an objection against a disposition by the execution officer who has revoked the execution procedure, or a decision to order the execution officer to revoke the execution procedure. Thus, an immediate appeal may be filed if a judgment on an objection against the execution constitutes such judgment. However, in other cases, an immediate appeal may not be filed against a judgment on an objection, and only an objection may be filed as a special appeal under Article 449 of the Civil Procedure Act applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Civil Execution Act (see Supreme Court Order 205Do87, Oct. 31, 2005). With respect to an objection against a judgment to which only special appeal is permitted, even if the parties did not indicate a special appeal as the Supreme Court, the court in receipt of such appeal shall be deemed a special appeal to be sent to the Supreme Court.

According to the records, the special appellant submitted a petition of appeal to the court of original judgment against the rejection ruling on the execution of this case against which an immediate appeal cannot be raised. The court of original judgment, considering the immediate appeal as a special appeal and sent the records of trial to the Supreme Court, it can be known that the immediate appeal was dismissed for the reason that it is unlawful. Thus, the court of original judgment's rejection ruling on the immediate appeal was due to the judgment of the court without authority. Thus, this case shall be treated as a special appeal against the

In light of the record, there is no unfair judgment on whether the order of the court below is a special ground for appeal of statutes, that is, a violation of the Constitution that affected the trial, or an order, rule, disposition which is the premise of a trial, or a violation of the Constitution or a law

Therefore, the special appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Nung-hwan (Presiding Justice)