The regulation regarding the method of seizure of property and rights held by third parties is set forth in Article 89 of the IHA Law. According to the relevant article, the initial seizure notice is first sent to the third party holding the debtor’s property or rights (including the right to claim) in the enforcement file. If this notice is contested, no seizure proceedings are carried out on the property or rights; however, if the notice is not contested, it is legally accepted that the debtor’s property is in the possession of a third party and that the claim has been transferred to that party. I f the initial seizure notice is not contested, a second seizure notice and then a third seizure notice are sent to the third party.
If a property belonging to the debtor or a third party and seized by the creditor is contested or misrepresented in the seizure notice, the third party can prove that they are not liable for the debt by filing a “negative seizure lawsuit” within fifteen days of the seizure notice being served on them. This is explicitly stated in the third paragraph of Article 89 of the IHA Law. As understood, if the third party wins this case, they are not liable for the amount claimed and are not required to deposit this amount with the enforcement office.
.
If the case is not filed within fifteen days from the date the offense is detected, the third party is required to surrender the property believed to be in their possession or the money believed to have been embezzled to the enforcement authority.
According to the fifth paragraph of Article 89 of the Economic Enterprise Law, a third party who believes that this payment is not based on a valid reason but who pays the bailiff because they have not or cannot fulfill the legal requirements has the right to file a labor lawsuit within one year from the date of payment. In this case, the third party becomes enriched for no reason and is obliged to pay this amount to the enforcement officer; moreover, this third party has no property or rights of their own. In addition, a labor lawsuit may be filed not only against the debtor who becomes enriched for no reason, but also against the creditor who, by collaborating with the debtor (in bad faith), puts a third party at risk.