Even in the case of a claim with executory power due to the confirmation of a payment order, such as this case, even if it is extinguished due to a cause such as a performance of snow and official duties, it does not automatically lose its executory power unless it is excluded by a lawsuit of objection against a claim.

Even in cases where a claim, which has an executory power due to the confirmation of a payment order, is extinguished due to the reasons such as repayment of snow and sand, etc., the fact that the payment of the debt does not automatically lose its executory power, so the fact that the payment of the debt is made does not constitute subparagraph 1 of this Article, and therefore, an appeal against the decision of permission of successful bid shall not be filed on such grounds.

Article 633 subparag. 1 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 64Ma337 Decided July 25, 1964

Re-appellant

Chuncheon District Court Decision 70Ra10 delivered on July 20, 1970

The reappeal is dismissed.

The Re-Appellant's grounds for re-appeal are examined.

The gist of the re-appellant's grounds for re-appeal is that the re-appellant paid to the non-party obligee KRW 221,220 as the principal of the debt and the expenses for demand procedure on December 20, 1969 and was exempted from all of the remaining interest and auction expenses. Thus, even though the debt was completely extinguished, it is unlawful that the auction procedure was in progress prior to the repayment. However, as in this case, even if the claim, which occurred due to the decision of payment order, is extinguished due to the reason such as the repayment of snow and sand, etc., even if the claim is extinguished due to the confirmation of payment order, it does not lose its execution power as a matter of course unless it is excluded by the lawsuit of objection against the claim, and therefore, it does not constitute Article 633 subparagraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act. Therefore, the fact that the repayment of the debt does not necessarily constitute an appeal against the decision of permission of auction for this reason. Therefore, it is decided as per Disposition with the assent of the participating judge.

Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court