logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.03.15 2018나2047845
제3자이의
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part of the reasoning is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not.

The plaintiffs asserted that since they acquired the ownership of the shares externally in accordance with the trust agreement of this case as the trustee of the shares of this case, the compulsory execution of this case shall be denied upon request of the defendant who is the truster D.

However, a lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit in case where a third party, who has ownership or right to block transfer or transfer of the object of compulsory execution, has asserted an objection against compulsory execution that is practically being carried out by infringing on the ownership or right thereof, and seeks to exclude execution. Thus, in case where a lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is filed after the compulsory execution concerned is completed, or compulsory execution that existed at the time of filing a lawsuit by a third party is terminated during the

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da49049 Decided October 10, 1997, etc.). Meanwhile, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1, 4, 7, and 8, the instant shares are sold to a third party in the instant compulsory execution procedure on January 30, 2019, and the said compulsory execution procedure has already been completed, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

3. Thus, the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed as unlawful, and since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, it is so decided as per Disposition by cancelling the judgment of the court of first instance and rejecting the lawsuit of this case.

arrow