Where documents prescribed in Article 510 subparagraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act are submitted after a decision to permit a successful bid is made in the procedure for compulsory auction, the effect of the decision to permit a successful bid.

Even if a document under Article 510 subparagraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act is submitted after a decision of approval of a successful bid has been made in the procedure for compulsory auction, such a reason cannot be a ground for objection that can affect the effect of the decision of approval of a successful bid which has already been lawfully made.

Articles 510 and 642 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 81Ma183 Dated December 22, 1981 81Ma197 Dated August 30, 1983

[Judgment of the court below]

Seoul Central District Court Order 86Ra183 Dated July 26, 1986

The reappeal is dismissed.

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

Even if the document stipulated in Article 510 subparagraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act has been submitted after the decision of permission for compulsory auction was made in the procedure for compulsory auction, such reason cannot be a ground for objection that can have the effect of the decision of permission for auction legally made (see Supreme Court Order 81Ma183, Dec. 22, 1981; Supreme Court Order 83Ma197, Aug. 30, 1983). According to the records, in the procedure for compulsory auction of this case, the decision of permission for auction has become final and conclusive on Jan. 22, 1986, and the Re-appellant submitted to the court of auction the original decision of the appellate court revoking the decision of provisional execution with the title of debt in the above procedure for compulsory auction and the original decision of the Supreme Court on March 12, 1986, the original decision of the appellate court that revoked the decision of permission for the commencement of auction of this case had been filed to the court of auction.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the above decision cannot decide on the validity of the adjudication of the successful bid as a result of submission of the original copy of the judgment and an objection against the decision to commence auction after the decision to permit the auction of this case became final and conclusive, shall be justified and there is no error of law pointing out the theory of lawsuit.

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed as without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)