[소유권이전등기말소][공1981.4.15.(654),13732]
Where the judgment of the first instance court with a declaration of provisional execution, which has become a title of debt, is withdrawn by an appellate court after the declaration of permission for auction, and the validity of the decision
Even if the lawsuit was withdrawn at the appellate court after the adjudication of permission for auction with respect to a compulsory auction under the name of debt of the judgment of the first instance court which declared provisional execution, the validity of the decision of permission for auction does not affect.
Article 510 of the Civil Procedure Act
[Judgment of the court below]
Defendant (Re-Appellant) 1 and 2 Defendants (Attorney Jeon Jong-gu, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)
Supreme Court Decision 80Da1411 Delivered on September 24, 1980
A reasonable judgment is sought from the cancellation of the above judgment subject to review.
The retrial lawsuit is dismissed.
Expenses for reexamination shall be borne by the plaintiff (Plaintiffs for reexamination).
The grounds for retrial of the plaintiff (the plaintiff's attorney for retrial) are examined.
According to the certified copy of the above judgment of the party member 80Da1411 which is bound in the records, even if a party member submitted the documents stipulated in Article 510 of the Civil Procedure Act, such as the decision of suspending compulsory execution, to the auction court after the decision of permission of compulsory execution was rendered, it shall not affect the validity of the decision of permission of successful bidding which has already been lawfully made. Since the decision of permission of compulsory auction was made after the decision of permission of compulsory auction and the lawsuit was withdrawn at the appellate court of the judgment of the provisional execution decision of this case which is the object of the decision of suspension of compulsory execution, the appeal of this case is dismissed by the plaintiff of this case, and this decision of the party member of this case is examined in light of the records of this case 80Da1411, and there is no error of law as to important matters that affect the judgment under Article 422 subparagraph 9 of the Civil Procedure Act as to the grounds for appeal. Thus, the lawsuit shall not be dismissed if there is no ground for retrial.
Therefore, the litigation for retrial is dismissed, and the costs of retrial are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Hong-chul (Presiding Justice)