[소유권이전등기말소][집18(3)민,294]
In a compulsory auction, the auction procedure shall not be interrupted even if the successful bidder dies after the decision to permit the auction, and the effect of the auction shall extend to his heir.
With respect to a compulsory auction, no auction procedure shall be suspended even if a deceased person dies after a decision on permission for falling under the auction, and the effect of falling under the auction shall extend to his heir.
Article 211 of the Civil Procedure Act
Supreme Court Decision 4291Da117 Decided May 15, 1959
Plaintiff
Defendant 1 and 13 others, the deceased Nonparty 1’s taking over litigation
Seoul High Court Decision 68Na818 delivered on July 15, 1970
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The Plaintiff’s ground of appeal (including the supplementary statement of the grounds of appeal) is examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below decided that the auction price was the successful bidder of the non-party 2 as of September 5, 1966. The court below held that even if the above successful bidder died on November 15, 1966, the execution court did not have any illegality in executing the auction procedure and closing the auction procedure. The above decision of the court below is just, and there is no ground in the lawsuit under the premise that the auction procedure should be suspended due to the death of the successful bidder. And the judgment of the court below is effective upon the successful bidder's death after the decision of the successful bidder's decision of approval of the auction, and it is decided that the ownership of the real estate of this case, which is the object of auction, belongs to the heir of the non-party 2, who is the object of auction, and the payment of the auction price is legitimate in the administrative act for the heir of the above non-party 2, and there is no illegality in law as to the transfer registration of the auction price of the non-party 2, which is not valid under the State Property Act.
All arguments are without merit. This appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
The presiding judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)