Whether there is a benefit in filing an objection to the re-grant of the execution clause where a compulsory execution based on the name of debt for which the execution clause has been re-granted has terminated (negative)

Where a compulsory execution is terminated on the basis of the name of debt for which the execution clause has been re-granted, there is no benefit in filing an objection against the re-grant of the execution clause.

Articles 484 and 485 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Suwon District Court Order 91Ra114 Dated December 14, 1991

The reappeal is dismissed.

As to the ground of reappeal

In the event compulsory execution is terminated under the name of debt for which the execution clause was re-granted, the debtor does not have any interest in raising an objection to re-grant of the above execution clause. The court below's decision is justified in accordance with the above legal principles that the respondent of the court below received an order of seizure and assignment of claims against the third debtor of the re-appellant based on the name of debt for which the execution clause was re-granted, which was served on the third debtor of the re-appellant at that time, and that it was served on the third debtor of the above third party. The decision of the court of first instance that dismissed

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

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice)