The Seocho-gu Saemaul Bank

The debtor

Jeonju City

Jeonju District Court Order 2010Kadan3730 dated August 13, 2010

The appeal of this case is dismissed.

The decision of the first instance shall be revoked.

In order to secure the debtor's claims, the appellant applied for provisional injunction against the debtor's private taxi transportation business license, but the court of first instance dismissed the license on the ground that it is not suitable for compulsory execution.

In this regard, the appellant asserts that the obligor has already prepared a non-license for the automobile transportation business in order to secure the appellant's obligation, and that the preservative measure on the license for the automobile transportation business is possible.

However, property rights subject to compulsory execution under Article 251 of the Civil Execution Act are independent of property value and transferable by monetary evaluation. According to the Passenger Transport Service Act, a person who intends to operate a passenger transport business shall obtain a license from the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (Article 4), shall meet certain license standards (Article 5), a license shall not be granted for a license (Article 6), a license for a passenger transport business operator shall be prohibited (Article 6), a license for a passenger transport business operator shall be prohibited (Article 12), and a license for a passenger transport business operator shall be transferred if a passenger transport business is intended to be transferred (Article 14), and a license for a passenger transport business shall be transferred to a transferee upon authorization from the Minister (Article 14), and a license for a passenger transport business shall be transferred to a transferee as a matter of course if the transfer of a passenger transport business is legitimate, and a license for a passenger transport business shall be legally qualified to conduct a passenger transport business regardless of the license for a passenger transport business. Accordingly, the license for a passenger transport business operator shall be converted to the same through compulsory execution (Article 198).

Considering that the appeal of this case is aimed at securing claims by the debtor's personal taxi transport business license as security, the appeal of this case is effective only when the appellant realized the above passenger transport business license. However, as seen earlier, it is inappropriate to consider the passenger transport business license as the subject of compulsory execution. Thus, it is difficult to do so even in the case of the preservative measure of this case, which is based on compulsory execution.

Therefore, the decision of the court of first instance as to this conclusion is just, and therefore, the appeal of this case is dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-jin (Presiding Judge)