logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1968. 1. 31. 선고 66다842 제3부판결
[가처분취소][집16(1)민,025]
Main Issues

The right to apply for the cancellation of provisional disposition due to changes in circumstances of subsequent purchaser of the real estate on which provisional disposition is executed.

Summary of Judgment

A person who has acquired the immovables subject to provisional disposition from the provisional disposition obligor shall be in the position of the debtor to apply for a cancellation of the provisional disposition order due to changes in circumstances.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 715 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 706 of the Civil Procedure Act

Applicant-Appellee

Applicant

Respondent, appellant

Respondent

Judgment of the lower court

Daejeon District Court Decision 65Na396 delivered on April 15, 1966

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Costs of appeal shall be borne by the respondent.

Reasons

The object on which a provisional disposition is executed is prohibited from a voluntary disposition, but the disposition itself is not null and void, but it is not possible to oppose the creditor of the provisional disposition in the scope of the object of the provisional disposition. Therefore, even after the provisional disposition is executed, the real right to the object of the provisional disposition can be acquired even after the provisional disposition is executed, but it is reasonable to interpret that the transferee of the object is in the position of the debtor to file an application for cancellation of the provisional disposition order due to changes in circumstances under Articles 706 and 715 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In this case, the decision of the court below is justified in the conclusion that the application for the cancellation of provisional disposition due to changes in the circumstances of the applicant who acquired the real estate from the provisional debtor for the provisional disposition is legitimate and judged like the original decision, and there is no objection to the contrary that the applicant does not have the right of revocation as the opposing opinion.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Na-dong (Presiding Judge)

arrow
심급 사건
-대전지방법원 1966.4.15.선고 65나396
본문참조조문
기타문서