Recently, the Supreme court held that it is possible that creditor of policyholder could get the attachment and collection order to all claims relating to insurance contract and surrender the insurance policy thereby directly. However, it is problem that the court permits creditor of policyholder to surrender the policy without any consent of policyholder or legal restriction. First of all, in compulsory execution law perspective, the way of surrender value into cash is discussed as three types; ① surrender the policy by surrogating the policyholder (Korea Civil Act chapter 404), ② special conversion order by court (Korea Civil Compulsory Execution law chapter 241), ③ direct surrender of creditor of policyholder by attachment and collection order. By the way, it is undesirable that the court admits of surrender the policy by surrogating the policyholder or direct surrender of creditor of policyholder by attachment and collection order in view of the nature of surrender value. In addition, at present the amendment bill of commercial act insurance chapter which contain the provision of prohibition on attachment of claim for life insurance is pending. Also in the light of this restriction of attachment, it is problem that the court permits creditor of policyholder to surrender the policy. And there are a lot of problems in the light of legal principles of insurance law. Above of all, if the court permits creditor of policyholder to surrender the policy without limit, insurance-related person is infringed on their rights unreasonably. Especially, beneficiary must be protected his legal rights in the lights of the nature of insurance contract, and many countries made the statutes that contain the contents of restriction to claim of creditor of policyholder for protecting the beneficiary. Also, it is desirable to admit the character of personal right about surrender insurance contract which is the basis of realization the surrender value. And it is questionable who has the right of claim for surrender value. In my opinion, it is determined one by one by the case who has the right. In conclusion, it is necessary to insert the provision of protection for beneficiary into law or insurance clause, and if necessary, it should be clearly prescribed that creditor of policyholder could not surrender the policy.