(a) Confirmation of a decision to grant a successful bid and extinguishment of mortgage;

(b) In case where a senior mortgage is extinguished due to a final decision of permission of auction, whether a junior provisional registration is subject to entrustment of cancellation pursuant to Article 61(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act

(a) If a decision to grant a successful bid becomes final and conclusive by the procedure of compulsory auction applied after the provisional registration with respect to any real estate on which a provisional registration is made to preserve the right to claim ownership transfer registration after the establishment registration was completed, the successful bidder acquires the ownership on the date of payment of the successful bid and simultaneously exists on the real estate shall be extinguished by Article 608(2) of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Inasmuch as provisional registration cannot be set up against the registration of establishment of a higher priority than it, the provisional registration also becomes extinct, so this provisional registration also becomes subject to the entrustment of cancellation, as the "entry of burdens on real estate which the successful bidder did not take over" under Article 61 (1) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act.

A. Article 608(2) of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 661(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act

(b) Order 80Ma491 dated December 30, 1980

Re-appellant

Chuncheon District Court Order 87Ra33 September 30, 1987

The reappeal is dismissed.

As to the grounds of reappeal:

(1) In the event that a decision of approval of auction becomes final and conclusive by the compulsory auction procedure applied after the provisional registration with respect to any real estate on which a provisional registration for preserving the right to claim ownership transfer registration was made after the establishment registration of a mortgage, the successful bidder acquires the ownership on the date of payment of auction price and at the same time acquires the ownership on the date of payment of auction price and the mortgage existing on the real estate pursuant to Article 60

The effect of the change in the real right due to the confirmation of approval of a successful bid is to be done regardless of the registration. However, in order to coincide with the fact of the entry of the registry and the change in the real right, the Civil Procedure Act shall only send the original copy of the decision of the successful bid to the registry official after the execution of the distribution schedule and send it to the registry official for the entrustment of the entry of the copy of the decision of the successful bid under Article 61, Article 61

In addition, since the above provisional registration cannot be set up against the registration of creation of a mortgage prior to the above order, the above provisional registration also becomes extinct, so this provisional registration also becomes subject to the entrustment of cancellation as "entry of burdens on real estate which the successful bidder did not take over" under Article 661 (1) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act (see Supreme Court Order 80Ma491 Dated December 30, 1980).

The theory of lawsuit is the mortgagee mentioned above, and at the same time, the re-appellant, who is the person holding the provisional registration, has renounced the mortgage before the execution of the distribution schedule after the successful bid became final and completed the registration of cancellation of the registration of establishment of a mortgage without being given preferential payment due to the auction proceeds, and also completed the principal registration based on the provisional registration, it is unreasonable to make the original registration to be cancelled in accordance with Article 61 (1) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, even if it is based on the re-appellant's assertion itself, it is clear that the mortgage has not been extinguished before the decision of approval of the successful bid becomes final and conclusive. Therefore, in light of the above legal principles,

The precedents of party members cited by the theory of lawsuit are not appropriate in this case.

(2) According to the records, it is clear that the auction court entrusted a registry official with the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of a successful bidder under Article 61 (1) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act, provisional registration and principal registration under the name of the re-appellant as cancellation under Article 61 (2) 2 of the same Act, and the registry official's decision of rejection was made on the ground of Article 55 subparagraph 6 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, and the successful bidder filed an objection in this case pursuant to Article 178 of the Registration of Real Estate Act is not an objection against the disposition of the registry official registered in the name of the re-appellant in order to seek cancellation of the principal registration based on the provisional registration of the re-appellant, or to seek cancellation of the principal registration based on the provisional registration of the re-appellant. Thus, the court below

The theory of the lawsuit is examining the theory by misunderstanding the disposition of a registry official who is the object of the objection of this case, and the precedents of the quoted party members cannot be accepted as appropriate in this case.

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

Justices Lee Byung-hee (Presiding Justice)