(a) The meaning of the provision that no immediate appeal shall be made under Article 5-2 (3) of the Act on Special Measures for Loans in Arrears by Financial Institutions and the granting of special appeal;

(b) a decision of rejection of an appeal against a decision of approval of a successful bid made without any security deposit, and the method of dealing with the appeal filed against that decision;

A. According to Article 5-2(3) of the Act on Special Measures for Delayed Loans by Financial Institutions, it is reasonable to interpret that an immediate appeal cannot be filed against a decision made pursuant to Article 5-2(2) of the same Act. Therefore, it is reasonable to interpret that an immediate appeal cannot be filed. Accordingly, only special appeal under Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act is permitted

B. The court of original judgment which rejected an appeal against the decision of approval of a successful bid filed without a security deposit shall be allowed only special appeal under Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, the court of original judgment which received a written appeal against this decision shall send the record to the Supreme Court even though there is no indication of special appeal in the written appeal.

Article 5 Section 2 of the Act on Special Measures for Loans in Arrears by Financial Institutions, Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Seoul Central District Court Order 82Ma3232 Decided July 29, 1982

The special appeal shall be dismissed.

According to the records, this case is obvious that the Re-Appellant had not filed a security deposit under Article 5-2 (1) of the Act on Special Measures for Loans in Arrears by Financial Institutions in filing an appeal against the decision of permission of auction by the auction court. Thus, it is reasonable to interpret that the auction court can not file an immediate appeal against the decision under Article 5-2 (3) of the Act on Special Measures for the Development of Special Measures, and that the purport that the appeal cannot be filed against the decision under Article 5-2 (2) of the same Act and that the appeal cannot be filed. Thus, the above decision shall be permitted only to the special appeal under Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, even if the appellant did not indicate a special appeal filed with the Supreme Court, the court below (the auction court in this case refers to the auction court) which received the appeal shall send records to the Supreme Court. Thus, in this case, the court below's decision to dismiss the appeal by considering the re-appellant's appeal as ordinary appeal and sending records to the Panel Division of the Seoul Civil and Security District Court is incidental to only one court which has no title to the same court's decision to dismiss the appeal. Thus, the party member shall treat the case as a special appeal against the decision of the court.

In light of the records, the Re-Appellant's original judgment is served on July 29, 1982 and submitted a written appeal to the court below on August 7, 1982, 1982, and it is apparent that the defects were not corrected. Thus, the Re-Appellant's original judgment constitutes an unlawful case where it is not possible to correct the defects.

Therefore, the special appeal shall be dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)