In the case of a voluntary auction, whether an action of demurrer can be brought (negative)

In order to suspend an auction procedure to exercise the security right to real estate, an appeal against a decision on commencing auction pursuant to Article 603-3 (1) of the former Civil Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 6626 of Jan. 26, 2002) shall be filed, and an appeal against suspension of execution equivalent to Article 484 (2) shall be filed pursuant to Article 603-3 (2) of the same Act, and an appeal against the validity of such security right may be filed, and the proceeding may be suspended by receiving an order for suspension of execution corresponding to Article 507 of the same Act, and a lawsuit seeking a refusal of direct auction shall not be filed.

Articles 505 (see current Article 44 of the Civil Execution Act), 507 (see current Article 46 of the Civil Execution Act), and 603-3 (see current Article 86 of the Civil Execution Act) of the former Civil Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 6626 of January 26, 2002)

Supreme Court Order 69Da23 dated March 2, 1970 (Gong18-1, 179), 75Da7 dated March 15, 1976 (Gong1976, 9079), Supreme Court Order 82Ma869 dated February 3, 1983 (Gong1983, 573), Supreme Court Order 86Da152 Decided March 10, 1987 (Gong1987, 625), Supreme Court Order 92Da35 dated January 20, 1993 (Gong193, 1053)

Plaintiff

Defendant (Attorney Down-hun et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Jeonju District Court Decision 2001Na6988 delivered on June 27, 2002

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

In order to suspend an auction procedure to enforce a security right to real estate, an appeal against a decision on commencing auction pursuant to Article 603-3(1) of the former Civil Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 6626, Jan. 26, 2002; hereinafter the same shall apply) shall be filed pursuant to Article 603-3(2) of the same Act, and an appeal against a suspension of execution equivalent to Article 484(2) may be filed, or an appeal against the validity of such security right may be filed, and the proceeding may be suspended by receiving an order for suspension of execution corresponding to Article 507 of the former Civil Procedure Act, and a lawsuit seeking a refusal of direct auction shall not be filed (see Supreme Court Decision 86Da152, Mar. 10, 1987).

In the same purport, it is proper for the court below to determine that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case seeking the refusal of auction procedure based on the right to collateral security, which the defendant formed the right to collateral security as the right to collateral security, is unlawful, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles or the violation of precedents as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and the costs of the lawsuit shall be borne, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Zwon (Presiding Justice)