民事執行의 理想으로서의 公益

Public benefit as ideal of civil affairs execution

It can be seen that the ideal of the civil action forms the ideal of civil affairs execution. Moreover it is regulated that civil affairs execution law article 23 term 1 “excluding the circumstances where there is a special regulation to this law, it applies correspondingly the regulations of civil action law regarding the procedures of civil affairs execution and preservative measure.” so, different to the opinion of looking at the ideal of civil action as the ideal of civil affairs execution, it seems as though there can be no different opinion. Therefore it is sometimes thought that legalistic character and ideal of civil affairs execution procedure don't need to be particularly understood. But even if the principle of civil action and civil affairs execution is identical, civil action procedure is ideally solving the dispute factum via mentality that has been through opinion proof(Verhandlungsmaxime) of the person concerned. Different to this the civil affairs execution systematically actualizes the authority of ideal acknowledged executive power original state, or it is a procedure that forcefully realizes the authority based on conversion right that is immanent in mortgage rights such as mortgage, right of pledge, the lease of a house on a deposit basis rights, and lien. Furthermore it is a procedure where human execution possible, so it is hard to see that the meaning of that principle is definitely identical. Therefore an examination is necessary to see whether legalistic character in a civil action is different to legalistic character of civil affairs execution procedure, whether regulations about ideal of Code of Civil Procedure article 1 are applied correspondingly in civil affairs execution and article 1, whether or not that meaning is identical if it is applied, and because there is the problem of whether the ideal different to civil action is needed or not. It is because the ideal of civil affairs execution is needed as the analysis ideal of civil affairs execution law, and as the appropriate standard of legislation(opening of court) direction according to the changes of society's economic important matters and sense of values that were prerequisite during the legislation. In this essay we looked at whether public good is needed as the ideal of civil affairs execution. There is no reason to object to the opinion 'civil action law article 1 term 1 is applied correspondingly', because civil affairs execution law does not keep the regulation about the ideal of civil affairs execution procedures. But rapidity, economics, propriety and equity according to civil action, does not have the same meaning with the legalistic character and civil affairs execution which objective is different. Also the existence of ideal besides the ones regulated in civil affairs execution law, that are deduced according to the various regulations that have been regulated in civil affairs execution law can not be denied. The procedural prowl in civil affairs execution is something that is arranged at the front in the ideal(especially propriety and equity) of civil affairs execution, but preferably in civil affairs execution procedure if there is no prowling, it brings execution incapable situation due to the debtor, so not only will it be against propriety and equity but it will bring the result which makes it harder for idea achievement of economy and rapidity. Also it can be said that the civil action procedure actually does not have public beneficial and third person-wise relative importance, and there are very little circumstances where it has any effects. On the contrary civil affairs execution procedure has more gain and loss related people than civil action, and it is a procedure of substantially realizing creditor's authority. So t