In case where the obligor, who had not been absent on the date of distribution at the auction procedure, files an application for the delivery of a letter of entrustment for payment with the court of execution and the issuance of a certificate of qualification in order to pay the remaining amount of dividends deposited to himself/herself, the method of appeal against it

In order for the debtor who was not present on the date of distribution to withdraw the remaining amount of the dividends deposited to himself at the auction procedure, the execution court shall send a written entrustment for payment to the deposited public official pursuant to Article 39 of the Rules on the Management of Deposit Affairs, and if the debtor has issued a certificate of qualifications therefor to the debtor, the debtor shall request the deposited public official to pay the deposit. In this case, the execution court shall send a written entrustment for payment to the deposited public official and deliver a certificate of qualifications to the debtor, and it shall be deemed that the affairs to deliver the certificate of qualifications to the debtor are affairs incidental to the execution procedure for the withdrawal of the remaining amount of the dividends deposited by the execution court, not the deposit public official, but the objection against the execution under Article 504 of the Civil Procedure Act is not raised against the disposition of the deposited public official under Article 10 of the Deposit Act in order to raise an objection against the disposition of the execution court on the relevant affairs. Therefore, such objection shall not be subject to the disposition of the execution court on the remaining amount of dividends deposited

Article 504 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 10 of the Deposit Act, Article 39 of the Rules on the Management of Deposit Affairs

Re-appellant

Suwon District Court Order 98Ra108 dated February 24, 1999

The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Suwon District Court Panel Division.

1. The court below held that the court below deposited 15,091,949 won as the execution court did not appear as the debtor on the date of distribution of the real estate in the procedure of compulsory auction of this case (12,091,949 won as the third party after deposit set forth in the above Civil Procedure Act remains in the future of the re-appellant because it seized the right to demand payment of the re-appellant and pays a part of the deposit money under the order of the re-appellant) and the re-appellant filed an objection against the execution of this case under Article 504 of the Civil Procedure Act as he refused to deliver a certificate of qualification to the execution court to pay the above deposit money after the re-appellant's request for the issuance of a certificate of entrustment to the deposited public official. Since the above auction procedure was completed after the distribution procedure had already been completed, the re-appellant filed an objection against the disposition of the deposited public official under Article 10 of the Deposit Act, it is not allowed to file an objection against the enforcement of the above

2. However, in order for a debtor who fails to appear on the date of distribution to distribute the remaining amount of the dividends deposited to himself/herself in the auction procedure, the court of execution shall send a written entrustment for payment to the deposited public officials under Article 39 of the Rules on the Management of Deposited Affairs, and if the debtor issues a certificate of qualifications to the debtor, the debtor shall request the deposited public officials to pay the deposit. In such cases, the court of execution shall send a written entrustment for payment to the deposited public officials and deliver a certificate of qualifications to the debtor, and the affairs to issue a certificate of qualifications shall be deemed to be incidental to the execution procedure for the withdrawal of the remaining amount of the dividends deposited by the court of execution, not the deposit public officials' deposit officer's request for objection against the execution under Article 504 of the Civil Procedure Act, rather than the execution procedure's request for objection against the disposition of the court of execution on the said affairs. Further, the objection shall not be subject to the disposition of the court of execution on the dividend procedure, so there is no benefit to file an objection after the completion of the distribution procedure. The court's objection shall be justified.

3. Therefore, the order of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Shin Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)