The submission of a certificate of performance after the decision to grant the successful bid may not be a reason for appeal.

Even though the documents under Article 510 of the Civil Procedure Act are submitted after a decision of approval of a successful bid has been made in the procedure for compulsory auction, such a reason can not be a reason for appeal which can affect the effect of the decision of approval of a successful bid which has already been lawfully made.

Articles 642, 633, and 510 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court en banc Order 77Ma452 Dated December 19, 1978

Re-appellant

Seoul Central District Court Order 79Ra253 Dated December 27, 1979

The reappeal is dismissed.

The Re-Appellant's ground for reappeal is examined.

Even if a document stipulated in Article 510 of the Civil Procedure Act has been submitted after a decision of permission for compulsory auction was made in the procedure of compulsory auction, such reason cannot be the reason for appeal which can decide on the validity of the decision of permission for auction which has already been lawfully made (see this case's decision 7Ma452 delivered on December 19, 1978). According to the records, the re-appellant submitted a receipt of the auction claim dated November 27, 1979 prepared by the auction creditor after the decision of permission for auction of this case was made on November 26, 1979 to the court below which was the appellate court, which rejected the compulsory execution of this case and approved the compulsory execution order of December 18, 1979, it is clear that the second appeal of this case has no effect of the decision of permission for auction of this case since it was merely a second appeal of February 29, 1980.

Therefore, the decision of the court below that dismissed the appeal by the re-appellant is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Dra-ro (Presiding Justice)