The collection preservation order under Articles 5(1) and 8 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Confiscation and Restoration of Corruption Property, Articles 10(1) and 12 of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment, and Article 52 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Prevention of Illegal Trafficking in Narcotics, Etc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on Special Cases Concerning the Prevention of Illegal Trafficking in Narcotics, etc.") is an order prohibiting the disposal of a defendant's property when it is deemed that the execution is likely to be impossible or significantly difficult, which is similar to the provisional seizure order under the Civil Execution Act. Accordingly, Article 54(1) and (3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Confiscation of Narcotics, etc. provides that the collection preservation order shall be executed by a prosecutor's order and the prosecutor's order shall have the same effect as the provisional seizure order under the Civil Execution Act, and the provisions of other Acts and subordinate statutes on the procedure for the execution of provisional seizure under the Civil Execution Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the execution of collection preservation order.

However, Article 311 of the Civil Execution Act provides that, in principle, the competent court of the merits of the provisional seizure case shall be the first instance court among the competent court of the provisional seizure case. Where the merits are pending in the second instance court, the second instance court shall be the competent court of the merits. Furthermore, where the merits are pending in the court of final appeal, the first instance court of the merits shall be deemed to have jurisdiction over the provisional seizure case as the court of the merits (see Supreme Court Order 68S1, Mar. 19, 1969; Supreme Court Order 2002 businessz.4, Apr. 24, 2002). In light of the above, it is inappropriate for the court of final appeal to examine the facts as to whether the collection preservation order and the requirements for revocation thereof are met, the court of final appeal shall be deemed to have the competent court of the first or second instance of the merits case, and after the final appeal of the merits case was filed, the court of the first instance shall be deemed to have jurisdiction over the court of final appeal of the merits case.

Therefore, the case shall be transferred to the Gwangju District Court, which is the first instance court of the criminal case against the defendant, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yang Chang-soo (Presiding Justice)