Whether Article 13(2) of the Emergency Order applies to cases where a decision to grant permission for a compulsory auction becomes final and conclusive;

If a decision of approval of auction becomes final and conclusive in a compulsory auction, it cannot be applied to the provisions of paragraph (2) of the emergency order, so there is no influence on the auction procedure necessary for the realization of successful bidder's rights, such as the payment of the successful bidder's price, transfer of ownership of the property

§ 13(2) of the Emergency Decree on Economic Stabilization and Growth

[Judgment of the court below]

Busan District Court Order 74Ra55 dated September 23, 1974

The original decision shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

As to the ground for reappeal by the re-appellant:

According to the explanation of the reasoning of the original decision, even if a successful bidder's decision of suspension of compulsory auction or a final and conclusive judgment of refusal of execution by a lawsuit for objection becomes final and conclusive after the decision of permission of compulsory auction becomes final and conclusive, if an order of payment is issued by setting the deadline for payment of auction price, it will take place if the order of payment is made by setting the deadline for payment of auction price, but the creditor's acceptance of auction price according to the distribution procedure will take effect as repayment of bonds. Accordingly, in light of the provisions of Article 13 (1) of the above order, the compulsory auction procedure to be suspended by the above order includes not only the payment procedure, but also the procedure for the compulsory auction price distribution, which is based on the premise that the decision of permission of compulsory auction does not include the payment procedure after the decision of permission of auction becomes final and conclusive, so if the decision of permission of compulsory auction becomes final and conclusive, it does not constitute an unlawful decision of cancellation of ownership of the above real estate at the fixed date for compulsory auction price.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges under Article 413(2) and Article 406 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Justices Rin- Port (Presiding Justice)