In the case of a provisional disposition by which an acting director of an organization is appointed, whether the remuneration of an acting director paid from the cash prepaid by the creditor constitutes an execution cost under Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act (affirmative)

Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act provides that the expenses necessary for compulsory execution shall be borne by the debtor and shall be preferentially reimbursed by the execution. Article 24(1) of the Civil Execution Rule provides that the expenses for the execution to be borne by the debtor under the provisions of Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act, which have not been reimbursed in the execution procedure, shall be determined by the execution court by decision upon the application of the parties concerned. In addition, since the provisions concerning compulsory execution apply mutatis mutandis to the execution of provisional seizure and provisional disposition (Articles 291 and 301 of the Civil Execution Act), the expenses incurred in the execution of provisional seizure and provisional disposition are applicable mutatis mutandis (Articles 291 and 301 of the Civil Execution Act). In the case of provisional disposition in which the acting person of the officer of the organization, etc. is appointed, the remuneration of the acting person paid

Articles 53(1), 291, and 301 of the Civil Execution Act; Article 24(1) of the Civil Execution Rule

Appellant 1 and 3 others (Law Firm also, Attorneys Kim Jong-ho et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Daejeon District Court Order 2010Ra236 dated January 13, 2011

All reappeals are dismissed.

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act provides that the expenses necessary for the compulsory execution shall be borne by the debtor and the compensation shall be made preferentially by the execution. Article 24(1) of the Civil Execution Rule provides that the execution cost to be borne by the debtor under the provisions of Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act shall be determined by the execution court by decision upon the application of the parties concerned.

In addition, since the provisions concerning compulsory execution are applied mutatis mutandis to the execution of provisional seizure and provisional disposition (Articles 291 and 301 of the Civil Execution Act), the expenses incurred in the execution of provisional seizure and provisional disposition are considered execution expenses. In the case of provisional disposition in which an acting director of an organization, etc. is appointed, the remuneration of the acting director paid from the money prepaid by the creditor constitutes the expenses incurred in the execution of provisional disposition and thus, it should be deemed execution expenses stipulated in Article 53(1)

In the same purport, the court below is just in holding that the remuneration of the representative paid out of the money prepaid by the applicant is included in the execution cost to be borne by the respondent, who is the provisional disposition obligor, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to

Therefore, all reappeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Young-chul (Presiding Justice)