가압류와 목적물의 표시

A Study on Necessity of Indicating the Object of Attachment

In Korea, the plaintiff should fix up the object when he file an attachment case. The court, after the trial, makes a decision of attachment order to the specific object. This is an established custom in Korean court and legal field. In the sense, the attachment cases are divided into real estate attachment, movables attachment and claims attachment depending on the object of attachments. But in Korean law, there is no ground such a regulation to fix up the object in the process of attachment. Such a custom is derived from pursuit of convenience of execution of attachment to avoid separate application for the attachment execution. But the process containing the object of attachment makes several problems. First, the cases are differentiated by the object in spite of the same parties and the same claim. Second, the plaintiff must file another attachment case when he did not succeed to get sufficient conservation from the attachment. Third, the object makes the procedure more complex and delay. As a conclusion, after reviewing the pros and cons of the various grounds, we insist to get rid of the object from the attachment process. By doing so, the process could be normalized and both the court and the parties could find adequacy and affordabillity. Of course the plaintiff, if he wants, could apply execution to a specific object simultaneously with the filing attachment case.