Cha&Kwon Law Offices deputized a lawsuit claiming the restitution of loan. The client had lent money to “A” several times, but A deceased without returning the loan. Thus, the client filed a lawsuit claiming the restitution of loan to A’s heirs.

Concerned that if A’s heirs do not have any executable properties, the client will not be able to retrieve the loan even if he wins, Cha&Kwon Law Offices applied for provisional seizure of property and received decision on acceptance from the court.

If application for provisional seizure is accepted, the court usually requires the creditor to provide collateral for the purpose of covering the damage that might happen to the debtor from provisional seizure. In this case, collateral provision is made by depositing certain amount of money to court. If the creditor does not have enough money, the collateral provision decision from the court could act in a way which forces the creditor to give up his preservation of a right.

In this case, the creditor could not afford the several million Won the court ordered as deposit for collateral. Cha&Kwon Law Offices filed an immediate appeal against the court’s order of collateral provision, requiring 1) the court’s decision to order the creditor to provide deposit is unjust and 2) to substitute the deposit amount with a consignment agreement of payment guarantee. The court accepted this proposal.

In cases such as this one, the cost of litigation could hinder the client to preserve his rights.

Cha&Kwon Law Offices will put our utmost effort to make sure that our clients do now give up their rights due to litigation costs.