(1) Whether a decision of auction or a decision of approval of auction has been made to the person who had already died before the request for auction

Even if the "A" died before a request for auction, the auction court made a decision of commencement of auction or a decision of approval of auction by making the above "A" as the owner, so long as there was no request for resumption from the heir, it cannot be said that the auction court erred.

4 persons, including four persons, who are the legal profession of the deceased Shin Jong-il, and who are involved in the litigation.

Daegu District Court Order 75Ra37 dated July 30, 1975

The reappeal is dismissed.

The grounds for reappeal are examined.

According to the records, the fact that Shin Jong-il, the owner of the auction real estate of this case, died on January 9, 1975, prior to the decision of commencement of auction, was not asserted until the court below's decision, and there was no evidence to acknowledge the fact. Moreover, since the voluntary auction of mortgaged real estate by collateral security is in progress in relation to the debtor and the owner of the mortgaged real estate, the procedure is in progress prior to or during the commencement of the procedure, even if there was the death of the debtor or owner, the auction court's decision of commencement of auction or permission of the auction of mortgaged real estate cannot be deemed unlawful even if the auction court did not confirm the death of the debtor or owner on the registry which already died and continued the procedure, as long as it did not take over the procedure of auction, even if the auction court did not allow the auction of the mortgaged real estate by continuing the procedure (see Supreme Court Order 69Ma581, Sep. 23, 196; Supreme Court Order 66Ma66, Feb. 14, 1969).

Therefore, even if the new trial, the owner of the real estate, died before the application for auction of this case, the auction court's decision on the commencement of auction of this case or the permission of auction of this case was made with the owner of the above new trial as long as there was no request for resumption from the heir.

Therefore, the reappeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Shin Young-chul (Presiding Justice)