Even if there is an attachment of the record of the application for voluntary auction by a financial institution to the auction procedure by the creditor other than a financial institution, the attachment of such record shall not be effective as long as the decision to commence the auction case has not been revoked already in progress.

Even if there is an application for voluntary auction by a financial institution in an auction procedure by a creditor other than a financial institution, the record is attached, so long as the decision on commencing auction has not been revoked, there is only the effect of demand for distribution of such auction proceeds.

Article 5-2 of the Act on Special Measures for Delayed Loans by Financial Institutions

Appellant 1 et al.

Daegu District Court Decision 71Ra147 delivered on January 10, 1972

The case shall be reversed and remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.

Re-Appellants' grounds of reappeal (including grounds of reappeal 2) are examined.

According to the records, the case is a voluntary auction case against the creditor, non-party 1, who is the object of the right to collateral security, which is the object of the right to collateral security, and the auction court made a decision to commence an auction on the real estate under the above right to collateral security, and made an appraisal of the real estate at the lowest auction price, and it is apparent that the commercial banks in Korea, as the result of the auction conducted the auction with the lowest auction price on the real estate under the above right to collateral security, it is the case where the Korean commercial banks sold the real estate as the auction, and even if the auction record is attached to the auction record, the attachment of the record is unless the decision to commence the auction in the exhibition auction case has already been cancelled, so long as the decision to permit the above auction price has already been without the effect of the request to compensate for the auction price, the presiding judge of the court below did not have any obvious error in the correction order because it did not have any error in the opinion of the court below as to whether there was any error in the correction order as stated in Article 5-2 of the Act.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Ma-dong (Presiding Judge) and Ma-dong B-Jed Han-gu