(a) In the public notice of the auction date, the effect of the uncertainty or non-entry of the public notice;

(b) A case where it is deemed that the entry with the official seal is unclear or omitted.

A. In the public notice of the date of auction, if it is not clear about taxes and other public imposts, which are the requirements of the public notice, or there is an error of omission in the entry of part of real estate for the purpose of auction, the decision of approval of auction is

B. Where taxes and other public imposts on the land of three parcels which are real estate for the purpose of auction are different for each other, if the auction court publicly announces that taxes and other public imposts on the said three parcels are the same for each auction date, there is an error of law by omitting the entry of the land for partial auction purpose.

Article 618 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 69Ma984 Decided November 28, 1969 66Ma360 Decided September 6, 1966

Re-appellant

Daegu District Court Order 79Ra21 dated June 13, 1979

The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daegu District Court Panel Division.

According to the records, the amount of taxes and other public charges on the land of three parcels, which is real estate for the purpose of auction in this case, is KRW 1,379 per annum, and KRW 581 per annum, KRW 1,379 per annum, and KRW 1,224 per annum, KRW 586 and KRW 125 per annum ( Address 2 omitted) prior to the same city ( Address 2 omitted). The auction court held that the auction court made a decision on the permission of auction of this case by publicly announcing the taxes and other public charges on the said three parcels as at every auction date as at KRW 1,379.

Thus, the public notice of the auction date of this case is an obvious or omitted entry of part of the real estate for auction purpose, which is the requirement of the public notice, and therefore, the decision of permission of auction on the premise of this cannot be exempted from being unlawful. Therefore, the order of the court below that limited the decision is reversed and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Han-jin (Presiding Justice)