beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;
Reasons
1. On the basis of an executory exemplification of the judgment in the case of the purchase price of goods by the Seoul Southern District Court 2003Kadan52842 against Nonparty C, the fact that the Defendant was issued a seizure and collection order of the instant claim by the Seoul Central District Court 2016TTT13109 on July 27, 2016 does not conflict between the parties, or that the Defendant was issued a seizure and collection order of the instant claim by the Seoul Central District Court 2016TT No. 20109
2. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's right of recourse was extinguished since the defendant withdrawn the application for the seizure and collection order of the above 2016TTT 13109.
On the other hand, a lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is unlawful in cases where a third party, who has ownership or right to prevent transfer or transfer of the object of compulsory execution, raises an objection against the compulsory execution that is practically being carried out by infringing on such right, and seeks to exclude the enforcement thereof. Therefore, in cases where a lawsuit by a third party is filed after the completion of the pertinent compulsory execution, or compulsory execution that existed at the time when the lawsuit by a third party is filed, is terminated during the course of the lawsuit, there is no benefit
If a request for auction is withdrawn, the effect of seizure is extinguished, and the auction procedure is terminated naturally (Article 93(1) of the Civil Execution Act). Therefore, even in cases where a lawsuit by a third party was in progress at the time of filing a lawsuit, but a request for auction is withdrawn during the proceeding of a lawsuit, there is no benefit in the lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da207973, Jun. 9, 2016). However, the fact that the execution of the instant claim for which the plaintiff seeks not to execute is revoked by withdrawing the request for the seizure and collection order of the instant claim on September 8, 2016 while the lawsuit of this case is pending, is obvious in this court or recognized by the purport of the entire pleadings.
3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices who reviewed the instant lawsuit.