A. Non-existence of a secured claim already extinguished due to the exercise of a mortgage and whether there is a benefit of claim seeking confirmation of invalidity of an auction procedure (negative)

B. Whether a civil lawsuit is instituted against a country seeking the revocation of a commission on the grounds that the auction procedure is based on the invalid right to collateral security (negative)

A. The claim seeking confirmation of invalidity of the auction procedure which had already been extinguished due to the exercise of mortgage is nothing more than seeking confirmation of the past rights or legal relations, and the claim seeking confirmation of invalidity of the auction procedure which has already been terminated is not only for seeking confirmation of the past rights or legal relations, but also for obtaining such confirmation judgment against the parties who are not the successful bidder, so long as the confirmation judgment cannot affect the successful bidder, it cannot be deemed as an effective and appropriate means to resolve unstable rights or legal status of the plaintiffs. Thus, there is no benefit of confirmation.

B. That the auction court entrusts a registry official with the registration of ownership transfer, etc. of a successful bidder is ex officio conducted by the auction court in accordance with the provisions of statutes, and even if the auction procedure is based on the right to collateral security invalid, it cannot be claimed as a civil lawsuit against the State for the revocation of

(a) Article 228 of the Civil Procedure Act;

A. Supreme Court Decision 4293Da599 delivered on July 20, 1961, 64Da97 delivered on June 23, 1964, Supreme Court Decision 81Da294 delivered on February 9, 1982 (1982,302)

Plaintiff 1 and one other

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellant

Seoul Civil District Court Decision 91Na16500 delivered on September 1, 1992

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Of the plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case, the part concerning the confirmation of the non-existence of the secured claim in the auction procedure and the confirmation of invalidity of the above auction procedure against the defendants is nothing more than seeking confirmation of the past rights or legal relations that the secured claim of the right to collateral extinguished by the execution of mortgage does not exist or that the procedure of voluntary auction is null and void, and as long as the confirmation judgment cannot affect the successful bidder, it cannot be seen as an effective and appropriate means to resolve the plaintiff's rights or legal status unstable, and there is no interest of confirmation. Further, the part concerning the cancellation of the registration request based on the decision of permission of auction of the above voluntary auction case made by the defendant Republic of Korea with respect to the real estate of this case is ex officio by the auction court in accordance with the provisions of Acts and subordinate statutes, and even if the auction procedure is based on the right to collateral security, it cannot be claimed against the defendant Republic of Korea for the revocation of the entrustment as a civil lawsuit, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles or in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the interest of this case.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)