지장물 인도 청구의 소
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for alternative enforcement is dismissed.
2. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant A is a forest of etern C.
1. The reasons for the indication of the claim are as shown in the Appendix of Claim.
2. Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act (Judgment by public notice) of the applicable provisions of Acts;
3. The part which is dismissed ex officio is ordered to Defendant A among the lawsuits of this case.
We examine the legitimacy of the request for replacement execution, which is premised on the obligation to remove the house mentioned in the paragraph.
Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim for substitute execution is based on the latter part of Article 389(2) of the Civil Act and Article 260 of the Civil Execution Act, on the premise that the Plaintiff is subject to a favorable judgment on the part of the instant lawsuit regarding the claim for removal.
However, the alternative execution for non-performance of the alternative act obligation, such as the removal obligation, shall be executed after the creditor obtains an execution title, such as a judgment ordering the alternative act obligation, and upon receiving a decision of authorization by a separate application, it is not allowed to seek a substitute execution for the non-performance of the alternative act obligation before the enforcement title is established.
Therefore, the claim for substitute enforcement among the instant lawsuit is unlawful.