logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1971. 7. 21.자 71마513 결정
[부동산경락허가결정에대한재항고][집19(2)민,217]
Main Issues

In the procedure for compulsory auction of real estate, notification to interested parties of the auction date is not mandatory.

Summary of Decision

In the procedure for compulsory auction of real estate, notification to interested parties of the auction date is not mandatory.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 617 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Re-appellant

United States of America

Daejeon District Court Decision 71Ra35 delivered on May 14, 1971

Text

The reappeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The re-appellant's ground of re-appeal is examined as follows:

In the compulsory auction for real estate, Article 617 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that the date of auction and the date of auction shall be publicly notified to the interested parties as stipulated in Article 30 of the Auction Act, and since there is no provision that the interested parties be notified of the date of auction as to the compulsory auction, it is not mandatory to notify the interested parties. According to Articles 638 and 640 of the Civil Procedure Act, the decision of auction permission should be announced and the decision should be publicly notified on the bulletin board of the court, and since there is no provision that the interested parties should be notified, the compulsory auction for this case does not constitute an unlawful act even if the auction court did not notify the re-appellant of the date of auction, which is the interested parties, even if the auction court did not notify of the date of auction. The reason that the auction price is lower than the market price is not a legitimate ground of re-appeal.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court

arrow