채권자대위소송과 추심의 소의 경합
Conflict between An Obligee’s Action of Subrogation and Another Obligee’s Collection Claim
장재형(인하대학교)
457호, 54~67쪽
초록
민사소송에서 예외적으로 권리관계의 주체가 아니면서 소송수행권을 가진 제3자가 소를 제기할 수 있는데, 그 중에서 채무자의 동일한 채권에 대하여 제3채무자를 상대로 민법상의 일반 채권자대위소송과 민사집행법상 압류채권자의 추심의 소가 서로 경합함으로써 피상적으로 중복 소제기 저촉 여부 등이 문제될 수 있다. 이러한 채권자대위소송과 추심소송이 경합하는 경우 중복제소 저촉이나 당사자적격의 승계 여부가 문제가 아니고, 먼저 채권자대위권의 법적 성질이 제3자 법정 소송담당인지 아닌지, 제3자 소송담당이라도병행형인지 갈음형인지 여부, 다음으로 추심명령의 효력으로서 채무자 본인의 소송수행권이 상실되는지아닌지에 따라 논리적으로 해결되어야 한다. 다른 견해도 있으나, 통설 판례를 따르면 채권자대위권은 채무자와 더불어 병행형 제3자 법정소송담당이고, 한편 추심명령이 내려지면 압류채권자만이 당사자적격을 갖고 채무자 본인은 소송수행권은 상실한다는 것이므로, 채권자대위소송의 계속 전후를 막론하고 추심명령이 발령된 경우 채권자대위소송은 당연히 부적법하게 되고, 대위소송 중 추심명령이 내려진 경우에는 압류채권자는 선택에 따라 계속 중인 채권자대위소송에 승계참가를 할 수도 있고 따로 추심의 소를 제기하더라도 중복제소가 아니며, 한편 추심소송의 계속 중 제기된 채권자대위소송은 당사자적격이 없는 자에 의한 것이므로 당연히 부적법하다.
Abstract
An obligee can bring the action of subrogation of the fulfillment of obligation for obligor. In the while another obligee who achieves a collection command from the executive court is qualified to be plaintiff instead of obligor in the sue of claiming of the fulfillment of obligation for obligor. They have the qualification to be a party- standing by regulations. So when they bring the action of the fulfillment of obligation for obligor, the obligor cannot and should not take legal proceeding for the same fulfillment of obligation for himself. As an obligee brings the action of subrogation of the fulfillment of obligation for obligor in advance, can another obligee who achieves a collection command from the executive court file the suit for the same fulfillment of obligation? In conclusion a collection command deprives the obligor of the qualification to be a party for the fulfillment of obligation for himself. As another obligee achieves an ex post facto collection command from the executive court, the upper obligee cannot and should not file the suit for the same fulfillment of obligation for himself even if he went to suit in advance. Another obligee can bring action not only by attaching the claim to the advanced proceeding as a new successive party but also in addition separately. It cannot result in double or duplicate lawsuit due to the advanced action of subrogation by an obligee without the right of compulsory execution. In the opposite case when an obligee who achieved a collection command from the executive court brings an action of the fulfillment of obligation for obligor in advance, another obligee without the right of compulsory execution cannot file the suit of subrogation of the same fulfillment of obligation. Because an obligee's power of subrogation of the fulfillment of obligation for obligor derives from the obligor, but by the collection command obligor was deprived of the qualification to be a party for the fulfillment of obligation for himself. Even if obligor went to suit in advance for the fulfillment of obligation to him, it can result in double or duplicate lawsuit due to the ex post facto collection claim by his obligee. In addition without considering of a previous lawsuit in progress as double or duplicate lawsuit an obligor should fail to be a party as his obligee achieves collection command from the executive court. Because a qualification to be a party is preferred to double or duplicate lawsuit as requirements for litigation.
- 발행기관:
- 대한변호사협회
- 분류:
- 법학