Where a person who has reported his right after the adjudication of permission for adjudication has been made applies for quasi-deliberation.

Even if the decision of permission of a voluntary auction became final and conclusive, if there are grounds for a retrial under Article 422 (1) of this Act, it shall be subject to quasi-adjudication. If there are grounds for a retrial, the decision of permission of a successful bidder may be revoked in spite of payment in full or registration of transfer of ownership, and the effect of the successful bid may be denied. Therefore, the other party to quasi-adjudication shall include the successful bidder who has acquired the object of auction by the decision of permission of successful bid as well as

Article 30(3) of the Auction Act, Article 431 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Busan District Court Decision 66Ra236 delivered on November 7, 1966

The reappeal is dismissed.

The re-appellant ○○○’s ground for reappeal is examined.

A person who is entitled to file a petition for quasi-examination of the final and conclusive decision of permission for auction shall be deemed to be limited to the party who could have filed a petition for objection as an interested party with respect to the decision of permission for auction.However, although the re-appellant acquired a right to collateral security on December 27, 1965 with respect to the main auction ship, at this time, he/she had already filed a petition for auction against the main ship (application on July 30, 196

The Re-Appellant made a report on the acquisition of the right to collateral security against the auction ship of this case only after February 24, 1966, 1965.6.

Thus, the re-appellant is required to be unable to be an interested party who is entitled to appeal even before it becomes final and conclusive as to the decision of permission of auction. Therefore, the re-appellant is not allowed to file a petition for objection by reporting the right after the decision of permission of auction became final and conclusive. Therefore, such a person may not be an interested party who is entitled to file a petition for quasi-examination as to the decision of permission of auction. The order of the court below that held the same opinion as the party member is justifiable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the qualification of the party to the application

Accordingly, the reappeal is dismissed.

The opinions of involved judges are consistent with this decision.

The judge of the Supreme Court is Hong Dong-dong (Presiding Judge) and Dong-dong (Presiding Justice)