[2] In a case where the judicial assistant officer issued a collection order and filed an objection in writing stating that Gap was an immediate appeal, and the judge of the first instance court who received it acknowledged that the objection was groundless and ordered correction of recognition and delivery fees, and the Gap corrected it, and sent the record to the court, and the court below rejected Gap's immediate dismissal of appeal without issuing a separate written reason for appeal on the ground that Gap did not state a legitimate reason for appeal and submitted a separate written reason for appeal, the case holding that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles of appeal procedure as to the decision of the judicial assistant officer in the execution procedure, without ordering Gap to submit a legitimate reason for appeal under Article 15 (3) and (4) of the Civil Execution Act, for a reasonable period of time and without ordering Gap to submit a legitimate reason for appeal, on the ground that there was no legitimate reason for appeal

1. Where a single judge, etc. handles a disposition subject to an appeal, immediate appeal, or special appeal among the dispositions taken by a judicial assistant officer, a single judge, etc. may file an objection in accordance with the procedures prescribed in Article 4(2) through (10) of the Rules on Judicial Assistant Officials (Article 4(1) of the Rules on Judicial Assistant Officials), and where a judge, etc. in receipt of a case of objection under Article 4(5) of the Rules on Judicial Assistant Officials deems that an objection against the disposition subject to an appeal or immediate appeal is groundless, the disposition taken by the judicial assistant officer shall be authorized and the case of objection shall be forwarded to the appellate court. In such cases, the objection shall be deemed to have been filed (Article 4(6)5 of the Rules on Judicial Assistant Officials). If the objection fails to meet the requirements for an appeal or immediate appeal prescribed in the relevant Act, the court shall order the claimant to file an objection within a reasonable period, and if the petitioner fails to revise it, the court shall reject the objection in accordance with the procedures prescribed by the relevant Act (Article 4(6)6)6)6 of the Rules on Judicial Assistant Officials);

Therefore, the appellate court in receipt of the instant case from a single judge, etc. or a single judge, etc. who received the instant case on the decision of a judicial assistant, who may file an immediate appeal in the enforcement procedure, shall order the claimant to submit a written statement of grounds for appeal within a reasonable fixed period, in cases where the written objection does not state any legitimate grounds for appeal under Article 15(3) and (4) of the Civil Execution Act, and fails to submit a legitimate grounds for appeal, and fails to meet the requirements for an immediate appeal. However, only when the claimant fails to comply with such order, the appellate court may dismiss the written objection on the ground that there is no legitimate grounds for appeal pursuant to

2. According to the records, when the judicial assistant issued the order of seizure and collection on January 25, 201, the re-appellant raised an objection against the above order of seizure and collection, in writing stating that it is an immediate appeal sheet on February 17, 2011, and the judge of the first instance court receiving the case of objection against the order of seizure and collection of the above claim, the judge of the first instance court ordering correction of recognition and service charges on February 23, 201, recognizing that the above objection is groundless, and ordered correction, and the re-appellant sent the record to the court on March 9, 201. After receiving the record, the court below did not state a legitimate reason for appeal in the letter of appeal submitted by the re-appellant, but did not issue a separate reason for appeal within 10 days from the date of submission of the above letter of appeal. The court below rejected the re-appellant's appeal immediately on April 5, 2011.

In light of the above legal principles, the court below did not order the re-appellant to submit a legitimate written reason for appeal under Article 15(3) and (4) of the Civil Execution Act within a reasonable period of time and did not err by misapprehending the legal principles of appeal procedure against the decision of the judicial assistant in the execution procedure, which dismissed the appeal of this case under Article 15(5) of the Civil Execution Act, and thereby affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. Therefore, the order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ahn Dai-hee (Presiding Justice)