1. Of the instant lawsuit, the claim for revocation of the decision to commence compulsory auction and the claim for rejection of the application for compulsory auction.

Basic Facts

매매계약의 체결 및 지분소유권이전등기 원고와 피고는 2015. 7. 10. 원고가 피고로부터 공주시 F 임야 2,250,272m ^{2} 중 350,951/2,388,950 지분(이하 ‘이 사건 임야 지분’이라 한다)을 매수하는 계약(이하 ‘이 사건 매매계약’이라 한다)을 체결하였다.

With respect to the instant forest shares, the registration of transfer of ownership in the Plaintiff’s name (hereinafter “registration of this case”) was completed on July 14, 2015 as the receipt of No. 18209, July 14, 2015, as to the instant forest shares, by the Daejeon District Court’s official housing ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff.

On August 24, 2015, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note and issued a notarial deed to the Defendant on August 24, 2015, and delivered a promissory note with a face value of KRW 3.60 million (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).

On the same day, a notary public prepared a notarial deed No. 388 of the C Deed No. 2015 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with respect to the said promissory note.

[Ground for recognition] The Plaintiff’s judgment as to the claim for revocation of the compulsory auction decision and the claim for rejection of the application for compulsory auction by the Daejeon District Court’s official branch on August 9, 2017, as to the instant forest shares, as stated in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings, is against the Plaintiff’s revocation of the compulsory auction decision and the rejection of the above application for compulsory auction on August 9, 2017.

An objection against a ruling on commencing auction may be raised by an interested party to the court.

(Article 86 of the Civil Execution Act). A court of execution who has cancelled a decision to commence compulsory auction and applied for a compulsory auction shall take charge of the enforcement disposition.

The cancellation of the decision to commence compulsory auction and the rejection of the application for compulsory auction shall not be claimed against the court in charge of litigation other than the execution court.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above claim is unlawful.

Articles 50(1) and 49 subparag. 1 of the Civil Execution Act provide for the purport that compulsory execution is not permitted.