Where the appellate court revokes the original decision dismissing the application for provisional disposition and accepts the application for provisional disposition, the method of appeal therefor.

With respect to the decision of accepting an application for preservative measures such as provisional attachment or provisional disposition, which was made without pleading, the debtor or the respondent can raise an objection to the court that issued such preservative measures pursuant to Articles 703 and 715 of the Civil Procedure Act, and even if the decision was made by the appellate court, it cannot be asserted as a reappeal pursuant to Article 412 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Articles 703, 715, and 412 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 62Ma10 Dated Sep. 17, 1962 Dated Jan. 27, 1970 Dated Jan. 27, 1970 Dated Jul. 26, 1973 Dated Jul. 26, 1973 Dated Jul. 26, 197

Attorney Lee Jae-hoon, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Seoul High Court Order 90Ra39 Dated August 24, 1990

The reappeal shall be dismissed.

The grounds for reappeal are examined ex officio prior to judgment.

According to the records, the court of first instance rendered a decision citing the application for provisional disposition of this case without going through oral pleadings after the applicant filed an appeal to the court of original judgment against the decision of rejection of the application for provisional disposition of this case.

However, an obligor or respondent may raise an objection to the court that issued the preservative measure pursuant to Articles 703 and 715 of the Civil Procedure Act, and even if such a decision was made by the appellate court, it cannot be asserted as a reappeal pursuant to Article 412 of the Civil Procedure Act (Article 62Ma10, Sept. 17, 1962; Supreme Court Order 69Ma101, Jan. 27, 1970, etc.).

Therefore, the reappeal of this case is unlawful, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)