Where the time of vicarious execution is delayed by means of a warrant for vicarious execution after the disposition of vicarious execution that does not give a reasonable period of performance (negative)

Article 3(1) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act requires an administrative agency to grant a reasonable period for performing its duties when it gives notice of the time, etc. for vicarious execution with a warrant for vicarious execution. Thus, if the defendant, as the administrative agency, sent to the plaintiff on May 24, 198 a letter of order for vicarious execution of this case until May 24, 198 and the plaintiff received it on May 24, 198, the period for performing the duty is 5.24, which is the execution date, even if the defendant delayed the time of vicarious execution by the warrant for vicarious execution, the above disposition for vicarious execution of this case is illegal because the defendant did not set a reasonable period for performing the duty, and thus is against the due process of vicarious execution of this case.

Article 3 of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act

Gangnam-gu Law Office, Attorneys Park Byung-il et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellee-appellant

Heading Market

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu12140 delivered on February 7, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers:

In relation to the procedure for vicarious administrative execution, Article 3(1) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act provides that in cases where a person liable for performance is subject to the order under the preceding paragraph and fails to perform the obligation by the designated deadline, the administrative agency concerned shall notify the person liable for performance of the vicarious execution with a warrant of vicarious execution. Therefore, in order for the administrative agency to notify the person liable for performance of the time, etc. of the vicarious execution by the warrant of vicarious execution, the administrative agency must give a reasonable period to the person responsible for performance of the obligation in whole, and the administrative agency must give a reasonable period to the person responsible for performance of the obligation when the vicarious execution is conducted by the warrant of vicarious execution. The vicarious execution is illegal disposition that has not been granted the due date of the vicarious execution, and it shall be interpreted that the vicarious execution violates the due process of the vicarious execution, and there are circumstances such as delayed the time of the vicarious execution by the warrant of vicarious execution.

According to the records, the defendant sent the letter of order for vicarious execution of this case to the plaintiff on May 24, 198, and the plaintiff's receipt of it can be known to the plaintiff on May 19, 198, which is 5.24, the execution period. Thus, the judgment of the court below is just in holding that it was an illegal disposition on the ground that it did not set a reasonable period for payment as to the above vicarious execution order, and even if the period for vicarious execution was delayed on May 27, 198 with the letter of order for vicarious execution as alleged by the defendant, it does not interfere with the above conclusion. The arguments are groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and 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 Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)