B. Effect of the decision to suspend compulsory execution after the adjudication of permission for auction was rendered

B. In the compulsory auction, the decision to suspend the compulsory execution after a decision to permit a successful bid has been rendered shall not have the effect of suspending the progress of the auction procedure, such as the payment of the price according to the decision to permit a successful bid already declared.

The gist of the reason for special appeal is that the creditor (applicant) applied for a compulsory auction on the real estate in this case owned by the special appellant (debtor) based on the executory promissory note No. 2711 to 2714, 1979, which was in force by a notary public, and the compulsory auction is in progress. The special appellant filed a lawsuit of objection against the said promissory note No. 83Gahap358, which was the basis of the auction of this case after the creditor fully repaid the principal and interest on the debt to the creditor. Since the creditor filed a lawsuit of objection against the said promissory note No. 83Ka1586, which was the basis of the auction of this case, and received a decision of the suspension of compulsory execution from the court, the court below dismissed the application for the suspension of the auction procedure of this case with the original copy of the decision of suspension of compulsory execution

However, according to Article 510 of the Civil Procedure Act, if the original copy of the decision of the suspension of compulsory execution is submitted to the enforcement agency during the course of compulsory execution, the enforcement agency shall, as necessary, suspend compulsory execution. Thus, even if the enforcement court applied for the suspension of compulsory execution with the original copy of the decision of the suspension of compulsory execution attached, such a request is no longer meaningful than the meaning of demanding the compulsory suspension of compulsory execution. If the execution court receives the original copy of the decision of the suspension of compulsory execution and continues compulsory execution, it is possible to object to the procedure of execution.

Therefore, the court below's decision to suspend the auction procedure of this case does not require a separate judgment considering the purport that the execution court should be urged to suspend the execution as necessary, because the application for the suspension of compulsory execution under Article 510 subparagraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act is included in the submission of the original copy of the decision to suspend compulsory execution under Article 510 subparagraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, according to the records, the compulsory auction of this case was already declared in March 9, 1983, and the above decision to suspend compulsory execution was clearly made in March 23, 1983. In such a case, the above decision to suspend compulsory execution has no effect of suspending the progress of the auction procedure such as payment of price, etc. according to the decision to suspend compulsory execution (see Supreme Court Order 68Ma358, May 23, 1968). Thus, even if the court below's decision to suspend the compulsory auction of this case is an unlawful decision, it does not affect this conclusion.

Therefore, this special appeal is ultimately without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kang Jong-young (Presiding Justice)