In cases of auction of land designated as land scheduled for replotting, the method of public notice and the minimum auction price shall be determined.

Where the object of auction is a land scheduled for replotting, the method of displaying the real estate in the public announcement of the auction date shall include the specific details of the designation of the land scheduled for replotting in addition to indicating the lot number, land category, and cadastral records of the previous land, and in assessing the above real estate, the detailed circumstances (location, cadastral address,

Re-appellant

Seoul Central District Court Order 73Ra40 dated June 19, 1973

The reappeal is dismissed.

The grounds for reappeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the original decision, since it is apparent that each of the lands for auction purposes is designated as a reserved land by a land readjustment project, the court below should have stated the previous land number, land category, and land lot, not only but also the contents of the designation as a reserved land, so that people who will respond to the auction by clearly indicating the contents of the designation as a reserved land could know the real value of the real estate. However, if the method of displaying the real estate in the public notice of the auction date of this case was stated, the auction court stated only the previous land number, land category, and land lot but only stated "not less than five parcels" in addition, it did not state the specific contents of the designation as a reserved land. Thus, in assessing this real estate, the court below's decision that the court below erred by examining the specific circumstances (such as location, pointed, etc.) that were designated as a reserved land after the public notice of the auction date, and therefore, it cannot be justified in its determination that the court below's decision was unlawful as it did not state the above detailed reasons for the rejection of the auction report.

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Yoon-Jeng (Presiding Justice)