[집행판결청구사건][고집1983(민사편),87]
Requirements for filing a judgment of execution on a foreign judgment.
In order to accept a claim seeking a judgment of execution on a foreign judgment, the claim shall have become final and conclusive, and shall have its effect upon meeting the four conditions stipulated in Article 203(a) of the Civil Procedure Act, and if any of such conditions is not fulfilled, the lawsuit seeking the judgment of execution shall not be dismissed.
Article 203 of the Civil Procedure Act
Plaintiff 1 and five others
Offshore Shipping Co., Ltd.
Seoul Civil History District Court (81 Gohap7056)
All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
With respect to the claim for damages between the plaintiffs except the plaintiff 1 and the non-party 1 and the defendant, the judgment in the attached Form that the same court rendered on June 20, 1980 with respect to the claim for damages between the plaintiff 1 and the non-party 1 and the defendant can be enforced.
The costs of lawsuit shall be assessed against the defendant in both the first and second instances, and a declaration of provisional execution.
(1) Without dispute over the establishment of Gap evidence 1 (the original copy of judgment), Gap evidence 5-1, 2 (the certified copy of each family register), Eul evidence 5-3 (the certified copy of each family register), Gap evidence 5-4, 6, Gap evidence 7-1, 5, 7, and Gap evidence 7-2 (each certificate of the registered seal imprint), and the whole purport of the pleadings, comprehensively taking account of the whole purport of the arguments, Eul evidence 1 (the certified copy of judgment), Eul evidence 5-3 (the certified copy of each family register), Eul evidence 5-5-1 (the certified copy of each family register), Eul evidence 7-1 (the certified copy), Eul evidence 7-1, 57, and Eul evidence 7-2 (each certificate of the registered seal imprint), the defendant company's cargo 1-2 and the defendant company's 1-1 (the plaintiff 2, the deceased non-party 2, 3, 4, and the plaintiff 1-1 and the defendant 1-18 (the plaintiff 1) were killed and the plaintiff 1-18.
(2) As the cause of the instant claim, the Plaintiffs asserted that the said judgment was finalized on July 11, 1980 and all the conditions stipulated in Article 203 of the Civil Procedure Act are satisfied. As such, Article 477 of the Civil Procedure Act argues that a judgment of execution on the said judgment is sought, the judgment of execution on January 1, 197 shall not investigate the propriety of the judgment.
1. When the judgment of a foreign court is not certified;
2. Article 203 of the Foreign Judgment provides that the foreign judgment shall not satisfy the conditions of Article 203, and Article 203 of the same Act provides that the final judgment of the foreign court shall have the effect of fulfilling the following conditions:
1. The jurisdiction of any foreign court is not denied by law or treaty;
2. If the losing defendant is a national of the Republic of Korea, the service of summons or order necessary for the initiation of the lawsuit without recourse to service by public notice is received, or without recourse.
3. The judgment of any foreign court shall not violate good morals and other social order of the Republic of Korea; and
4. It is stipulated that there is a mutual guarantee. Accordingly, in order to accept a claim for a judgment of execution of a foreign judgment, the foreign judgment shall be finalized, and if one of the conditions is not satisfied, the lawsuit for a judgment of execution shall not be exempted, and if the condition is not satisfied, the lawsuit for a judgment of execution shall not be exempted. According to the records of evidence No. 2 (application for confirmation of final judgment) of the above foreign judgment as of July 11, 1980, the fact that the above foreign judgment becomes final and conclusive can be recognized as the lapse of July 11, 1980. However, in Japan, without examining the validity of the judgment of the Republic of Korea pursuant to a treaty or under its domestic law, it shall be recognized that Japan has the same provision as Article 203 of the Civil Procedure Act or under any more conditions, and it shall not be acknowledged that there is no provision of evidence No. 203 (application for confirmation of final judgment) of the Civil Procedure Act as otherwise asserted in Article 200 of the Civil Procedure Act.
(3) Thus, the plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case, which is based on the premise that the above Japanese judgment satisfies all the conditions of Article 203 of the Civil Procedure Act, shall not be accepted without further examination as to whether the other conditions are met. Thus, it shall be dismissed in accordance with the provisions of Article 477 (2) of the above Act. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is just and the plaintiffs' appeal is without merit, and the costs of appeal shall be dismissed and it is so decided as per Disposition with the plaintiffs' appeal.
Judges Kim Jong-ho (Presiding Judge)