(2),263,00 won 2,263,00 won 2,263,00

Although a building remains in its original condition at the time of granting a successful bid, in cases where the occupant has already withdrawn and all of the doors have been removed and thus is in fact at almost no-value, public notice of the date of auction is given to the public notice of the date of auction by setting the minimum auction price of the building at the minimum auction price which is remarkably unfair and unfair, and eventually, the auction procedure is in progress without a legitimate public notice of the date of auction.

Article 618 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Seoul Central District Court Order 78Ra130 dated February 15, 1979

The original decision shall be reversed and the case shall be remanded to the Seoul Civil District Court Panel Division.

According to the reasoning of the original decision, the court below maintained the first decision which granted the successful bid of this case on the ground that the auction court could not have conducted an auction on the building already destroyed because the real estate for the auction purpose of this case had existed until June 30, 1978, which was the date of the decision on the permission of the successful bid of this case, and that the real estate of this case was actually purchased to Seoul Metropolitan Government and could not be a cause for the auction court to refuse compulsory execution or to continue execution.

According to the records, the building of this case was destroyed due to the construction work of the urban planning facility No. 137 of the public notice, and the 1,902,80 won was paid as compensation by agreement between the owner of March 22 of the 1978 and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and removal was completed after September 13 of the same year (the commencement and completion of removal of the building seems to be not limited to the building, but to be related to the removal and completion of all the buildings for the construction of the above road), the auction of this case was conducted on June 27, 1978, and the auction price of this case cannot be seen as 2,263,00 won, and the auction price of this case cannot be seen as 6th day after the above 30th day of the auction procedure, and the auction price of this case cannot be seen as 2,602,00 won as the successful bidder and the auction price of this case cannot be seen as grounded in the records.

Therefore, the reappeal of this case is reasonable, and therefore, it is reversed the original decision and the case is remanded to the Panel Division of Seoul Civil Procedure District Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Hah-hak (Presiding Justice)