logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1979. 7. 24. 선고 79다1023 판결
[공탁의무이행청구][집27(2)민,221;공1979.10.15.(618) 12151]
Main Issues

Standing to institute a lawsuit demanding deposit pursuant to Article 582(1) of the Civil Procedure Act;

Summary of Judgment

According to Article 581 of the Civil Procedure Act, a dividend participant has the right to request a third debtor to deposit the amount of debt, but only the execution creditor who received a collection order may file a lawsuit for the above deposit claim, and the execution creditor who did not receive a collection order is not qualified as the plaintiff.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 582(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellee

Han-il Bank Co., Ltd., Counsel for defendant-appellee

original decision

Seoul High Court Decision 78Na3097 Decided April 6, 1979

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.

For the reasons of the judgment, the court below determined that the plaintiff's 77th Seoul District Court's 77th order against the non-party 1 was based on the executory exemplification of the judgment claiming a promissory note payment claim against the non-party 1 and that the non-party 1 was subject to seizure and assignment order of KRW 2,650,00 against the above non-party 1's defendant on March 6, 1978, and that the order was served on the non-party 1 on the non-party 1 on March 8, 1978, and that the seizure and assignment order of the above plaintiff's claim was already issued, and that the non-party 1's other creditor was not entitled to the above non-party 1's above provisional deposit claim against the defendant on February 13, 1978, and that the above collection order was delivered to the defendant on the original copy of the notarial deed with the above non-party 1, and therefore, the court below's determination that the above collection order was invalid under Article 58181 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The issue is groundless.

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Yong-chul (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1979.4.6선고 78나3097
본문참조조문
기타문서