1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding "2. additional determination" to the defendant's defense that the defendant additionally raised at the trial of the court of first instance, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4

2. Additional determination

A. In executing the decision of provisional disposition by indirect compulsory performance, Article 292(2) of the Civil Execution Act concerning provisional disposition applies mutatis mutandis to the creditor who received the decision of provisional disposition ordering the defendant's assertion of omission, so if the debtor commits an act of violating the order, he/she shall apply for indirect compulsory performance within 2 weeks from the time of the debtor's act of violating the order. However, if the debtor continues to commit an act of violating the order in the judgment of provisional disposition before the decision of provisional disposition is notified, he/she shall apply for indirect compulsory performance within

The Defendant, the obligor of the instant provisional disposition, has continued to commit an act in violation of the omission ordered in the instant provisional disposition order before or from January 10, 2014, and thus, the instant lawsuit filed after the lapse of two weeks from January 10, 2014 is unlawful.

B. In a case where a decision of indirect compulsory performance is simultaneously made with a provisional disposition ordering an omission, the decision of indirect compulsory performance itself becomes an independent title, and the procedure of real execution of compensation based on a decision of indirect compulsory performance is an execution procedure based on a separate monetary claim independent of the procedure of indirect compulsory performance, so it is not necessary within two weeks from the date of delivery of the provisional disposition order based on the decision of indirect compulsory performance.

(See Supreme Court Order 2008Ma1608 dated Dec. 24, 2008, regarding provisional disposition ordering performance of an alternative act obligation (see Supreme Court Order 2008Ma1608, Dec. 24, 2008). In Daejeon District Court Decision 2013Kahap48, this case’s provisional disposition order was issued.