The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Central District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In case where a creditor of provisional disposition has deposited a specified amount of money by an order to provide security by the court in order to secure a debtor for a provisional disposition due to a provisional disposition, the person under obligation to provide security shall have the same right as the pledgee for the deposit for security; and

(3) Article 19(3) of the Civil Execution Act and Article 123 of the Civil Procedure Act. Meanwhile, when a creditor holding a provisional disposition is declared bankrupt, his/her right to claim the recovery of the deposit money provided by the creditor holding a provisional disposition belongs to the bankrupt estate. Therefore, if the debtor holding a right as a pledgee with respect to the claim for recovery of the deposit money, the right to claim the recovery of the deposit money can be exercised

However, in cases where a claim for damages by a provisional disposition obligor, which is a security deposit, is a property claim arising from a cause arising before the bankruptcy is declared against a provisional disposition obligee, the bankruptcy creditor, constitutes a bankruptcy claim under Article 423 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Bankruptcy Act”), and thus, it cannot be exercised without resorting to bankruptcy procedures pursuant to Article 424 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act.

In addition, even if the right to separation of claims falling under bankruptcy claims as secured claims is the right to receive preferential and individual reimbursement for specific property belonging to the bankruptcy foundation, the right to separation of claims is not the right to receive repayment from all of the bankruptcy foundation at any time.

Therefore, filing a performance lawsuit against a provisional disposition obligee regarding the above claim for damages that constitutes a bankruptcy claim against the provisional disposition obligee cannot be deemed as the exercise of the security right to specific property belonging to the bankruptcy foundation, and thus, it cannot be deemed as the exercise of the right to foreclose outside bankruptcy proceedings.