Whether a voluntary auction procedure may be suspended by the general provisional disposition procedure under Article 714 of the Civil Procedure Act (negative)

In a case where the existence of a right to request a voluntary auction is disputed, in order to suspend the auction procedure, the auction procedure may be suspended by raising an objection against the ruling to commence the auction procedure under Article 603-3 of the Civil Procedure Act which is applied mutatis mutandis by Article 728 of the same Act, and the order to suspend the compulsory execution under Article 484 of the same Act, or by raising an objection against the obligation, applying mutatis mutandis Article 505 of the same Act, and it may only be suspended by receiving an order to suspend the compulsory execution under Article 507 of the same Act, and it shall not be suspended by the general provisional disposition procedure under Article

Articles 714 and 726 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 74Ma378 Dated November 5, 1974 (Gong1974, 8164) 75Da7 Dated March 15, 1976 (Gong1976,9079) 82Ma869 Dated February 3, 1983 (Gong1983,573)

Special Appellants

Gwangju District Court Order 92Kadan104 dated October 2, 1992

The order of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Gwangju District Court 200.

The grounds of special appeal are examined.

According to the records, the applicant for the suspension of the voluntary auction procedure of this case filed an application for provisional disposition on the ground that the applicant for the suspension of the voluntary auction procedure of this case may lose ownership of the above real estate due to the fact that the auction procedure of this case is in progress before the judgment in favor of the applicant, and that the provisional disposition on the temporary auction procedure of this case is likely to lose ownership of the above real estate, it is clear that the decision of the suspension of the voluntary auction procedure of this case is a general provisional disposition under Article 714 of the Civil Procedure Act.

However, in a case where the existence of the right to request a voluntary auction is disputed, in order to suspend the auction procedure, an objection against the decision to commence the auction procedure under Article 603-3 of the Civil Procedure Act applied mutatis mutandis under Article 728 of the same Act shall be raised, and an order to suspend the compulsory execution under Article 484 of the same Act shall be issued, or an objection against the obligation may be issued by filing a lawsuit by applying mutatis mutandis Article 505 of the same Act, and an order to suspend the compulsory execution under Article 507 of the same Act may be issued, and the procedure of the auction may not be suspended by the general provisional disposition procedure under Article 714 of the Civil Procedure Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 75Da7, Mar. 15, 1976; Order 71Da17, Nov. 25, 1971; Order 70Da24, Mar. 16, 1971).

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the suspension of voluntary auction procedure, which accepted the application for the suspension of voluntary auction procedure of this case by the decision of general provisional disposition, and it returned to the ground for the argument.

Therefore, the order of the court below 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.