In a case where the court, upon a debtor’s objection against the provisional disposition’s decision, declares the whole or part of the provisional disposition’s authorization or its modification, whether the suspension of execution under Articles 473 and 474 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be revoked (negative)

The provisional disposition pursuant to Article 714 of the Civil Procedure Act is a provisional measure for the purpose of preserving the right or setting a temporary position, and there is an urgent need. As such, in case where the debtor raises an objection against the decision of provisional disposition and the court is required to render a declaration on the authorization, modification or revocation of the whole or part of the provisional disposition with respect to the final judgment, the suspension of the execution of provisional disposition until the final judgment is rendered, by applying mutatis mutandis the provisions of Articles 473

Articles 473, 474, and 714 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 71Na14 Dated November 12, 1971 (No. 19 third citizen, 92)

Attorney Kim In-sik, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul Central District Court Order 90Ka41378 Dated June 1, 1990

The special appeal is dismissed.

The grounds for special appeal are examined.

The provisional disposition under Article 714 of the Civil Procedure Act is a provisional measure for the purpose of preserving the right or setting a temporary position, and there is an urgent need. Thus, in a case where the debtor files an objection against the decision of provisional disposition and the court is required to declare the approval or alteration of the whole or part of the provisional disposition as the final judgment, the suspension of the execution of provisional disposition cannot be allowed until the said judgment is rendered by applying mutatis mutandis the provisions of Articles 473 and 474 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The decision of the court below that dismissed the application to suspend the execution of the instant provisional disposition for the prohibition of construction works is just and without merit, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)