추심의 소에 있어서 몇 가지 쟁점에 관한 검토 — 대법원 2020. 10. 29. 선고 2016다35390 판결을 계기로 —

Review of Issues on Suit for Collection -Supreme Court Decision 2016Da35390 Decided October 29, 2020-

초록

In a recent decision (Supreme Court Decision 2016Da35390 Decided October 29, 2020), the Supreme Court decided that a decision for a specific creditor is not valid to other execution creditors even in case where more than one collection order exists on a single monetary claim. The decision is a meaningful trigger to discuss about the following issues which were debated over time-① whether the creditor is only a third party who brought the action of fulfillment or if he/she has a standing to seek judicial review which is related to the issue about the legal nature of the ‘lawsuit for collection’, ② the range of judgement effect of suit for collection, ③ if the intervention of another creditor is a third party intervention as a joinder of parties, ④ and if the joint action of multiple creditors is a similar-necessary joint litigation.

키워드

대법원 2020. 10. 29. 선고 2016다35390 판결추심의 소추심명령소송수행권공동소송참가기판력의 주관적 범위Supreme Court Decision 2016Da35390 Decided October 292020 Suit for Collection Order for Collection right to pursue proceedings Intervention as a Co-litigant subjective scope of res judicata
제목
추심의 소에 있어서 몇 가지 쟁점에 관한 검토 — 대법원 2020. 10. 29. 선고 2016다35390 판결을 계기로 —
제목 (타언어)
Review of Issues on Suit for Collection -Supreme Court Decision 2016Da35390 Decided October 29, 2020-
저자
전병서
DOI
10.29153/jcjel.2021.17.1.004
발행일
2021
저널명
민사집행법연구
17
페이지
179 ~ 208