Persons who have completed the registration of acquisition of ownership of the real estate at auction after the expiration of the appeal period against the decision of permission of auction; and

Any person who has completed the registration of acquisition of ownership of the auction real estate after the period of appeal against the decision of permission of successful bid expires shall not be an interested party who is able to file an appeal against the decision of permission of successful bid and an application for subsequent completion thereof.

Article 30 of the Auction Act

Appellant 1 and 2 others

Seoul Civil District Court Decision 67Ra218 delivered on October 15, 1967

All re-appeals by re-appellants are dismissed.

Re-Appellant 1's ground for re-appeal

According to the records, the Re-Appellant completed the registration of acquisition of ownership of the auction real estate on March 28, 1967 after the period of immediate appeal against the decision of permission of the auction of this case rendered on March 3, 1967, and submitted it to the auction court on March 31, 1967. Thus, it is clear that the Re-Appellant completed the registration of acquisition of ownership of the auction real estate on March 28, 1967 after the period of appeal has expired, and the reason was submitted to the auction court on March 31, 1967. Thus, the Re-Appellant's appeal against the decision of permission of the auction of this case and its subsequent completion cannot be an interested party who can file

In this case where the auction was conducted through the due process of the auction court's judgment of the reasons for reappeal 2 and re-appellant 3, the reason that the appraiser's appraised value or the bid price was reduced compared to the market price does not constitute a ground for appeal against the decision of permission of the auction. The remaining grounds for reappeal are new facts asserted in the court below and are not judged by the court below, and it cannot be a legitimate ground for reappeal since it is not a legitimate ground for reappeal.

Therefore, the re-appeal by the re-appellant is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court Dog-gu (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak and Mag-gu Mag-gu