Supreme Court: "Indirect Compulsory Order Possible in Judgment Procedures"… Existing Precedents Maintained

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] The Supreme Court en banc maintained the existing precedent on the 22nd that compensation can be imposed if the debtor fails to fulfill obligations even during the trial process.

The Supreme Court en banc (Presiding Justice Ki-taek Lee) confirmed the lower court's ruling in favor of the plaintiff in the appeal trial of a servitude establishment lawsuit disputing a claim to prohibit obstruction of passage that afternoon. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the existing precedent, stating that ordering indirect enforcement during the judgment procedure helps resolve disputes. The court stated, "Allowing indirect enforcement to be ordered during the judgment procedure aims to secure the effectiveness of enforcement and prevent enforcement gaps." On the other hand, Justices Ki-taek Lee, Cheol-sang Ahn, and Heung-gu Lee dissented, arguing that the current legal system distinguishes between judgment and enforcement procedures, so indirect enforcement, which is a type of enforcement, cannot be ordered through a judgment.

Earlier, plaintiff Mr. A filed a lawsuit requesting to prohibit defendant Mr. B from obstructing passage over land in the Chungnam area amid a dispute over ownership of the land. He also applied for indirect enforcement ordering compensation of 100,000 KRW per day if the order was violated. The first trial dismissed Mr. A's claim, but the second trial ruled in favor of the plaintiff and also accepted the application for indirect enforcement.

The issue was whether to maintain the existing precedent that allows ordering both performance of nonfeasance obligations and indirect enforcement simultaneously during the judgment procedure. Indirect enforcement is based on the Civil Execution Act and is a method of enforcement that applies psychological pressure on the debtor to fulfill obligations. For example, if the debtor does not fulfill the obligation by the end of the month, the court orders the debtor to pay a certain amount of damages per day thereafter. The Supreme Court has ruled since April 1996 that "indirect enforcement can be ordered under certain conditions during the judgment procedure," and some laws, such as the Media Arbitration Act, stipulate that indirect enforcement orders can be issued in judgments.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.