[담보취소결정취소결정][공1982.3.1.(675),216]
Withdrawal of the application for provisional disposition and the reason for cancellation of security after the execution of provisional disposition is impossible.
Even if the execution of provisional disposition was commenced, but it became impossible, and the creditor withdraws the application for provisional disposition, as long as the execution had been commenced, the debtor may have suffered honor, credit or other intangible loss, and it cannot be said that the security cause has ceased to exist with only the above reasons.
Articles 115 and 475 of the Civil Procedure Act
Supreme Court Order 67Ma154 Dated April 19, 1967 Dated February 22, 1962
Re-appellant
Other Party
Seoul Central District Court Order 81Ra161 Dated June 15, 1981
The reappeal is dismissed.
The grounds of reappeal are examined.
In the case of preservative measures, security funds deposited for the respondent's loss security not only guarantees for property damage but also non-property damage. Therefore, even if the court below failed to possess the debtor's movable property for the purpose of provisional disposition execution of this case and the re-appellant voluntarily withdrawn the application for provisional disposition, as long as the execution had already been commenced, the court below is just in holding that the ground for security has not yet been extinguished since it could cause honor, credit and other intangible damage to the respondent, and there is no error of law in the theory of lawsuit.
Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)