logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1972. 3. 28. 선고 71다889 판결
[손해배상][집20(1)민,153]
Main Issues

Even if the auction procedure has been completed after the execution of the right to collateral security, the auction court does not distribute the successful bid price to the person having the right to collateral security, since there is no complaint for the registration of the right to collateral security before the person having the right

Summary of Judgment

Even if the auction procedure has been completed after the execution of the right to collateral security, this does not affect the registration of the right to collateral security prior to the registration of the right to collateral security, and therefore the auction court shall not distribute the successful bid price to the person

[Reference Provisions]

Article 3(2) of the Auction Act, Article 34(3) of the Auction Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

Plaintiff (Attorney O Young-young et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant-Appellee

Korea

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 70Na3389 decided March 19, 1971

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s ground of appeal is examined.

Even if the auction procedure has been completed due to the execution of mortgage by the Seoul Bank, the mortgagee of the instant real estate, the court held that even if the registration of chonsegwon was temporarily cancelled due to clerical error, the execution of the said mortgage could not affect the Plaintiff’s right to the said real estate (refer to Article 34(3) of the Auction Act), and that the auction court rejected the Plaintiff’s claim of this case under a reasonable judgment that the payment of the bid price paid by the exercise of the said mortgage does not amount to the Plaintiff who is the registered owner of the right to lease on a deposit basis (refer to Article 34(2) of the Auction Act). In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da34427, Apr. 2, 2006).

The appeal is without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court of Korea (Presiding Judge) shall be the red net shots and the white shots

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1971.3.19.선고 70나3389
본문참조조문
기타문서