In case where the judgment of the provisional execution sentence of KRW 500,000 for the first instance is changed from the second instance to KRW 350,000, the extent that it has the effect of the sentence of provisional execution.

Even if the judgment of the court of first instance ordering a provisional execution of KRW 500,000 is changed from the judgment of the court of second instance to KRW 350,000, the provisional execution sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance is effective within the limit of KRW 350,000.

Article 201 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Seoul Civil District Court Decision 67Ra790 delivered on November 17, 1967

The reappeal is dismissed.

No. 1 of the grounds for re-appeal

Even though 50,000 won was changed from the judgment of the court of first instance to 350,000 won, which is the title of debt of the compulsory auction of this case, the provisional execution sentence of the court of first instance to the extent of 350,000 won is effective, and there is no error in the original decision since the judgment of the court of first instance, which is the title of debt after the original judgment, was changed, and there is no error in the original decision. Therefore, the argument is groundless.

The second ground of re-appeal No. 2

Since it is clear that the court of auction has reduced the lowest price under Article 631 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the degree of reduction can be reduced to the extent that it considers it appropriate by the court's discretion, there is no reason to criticize the legitimate measures of the court of execution.

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

Supreme Court Judge Madung (Presiding Judge) Kim Gung-bun and Madlebro