Whether the highest bidder may not allow the sale of real estate in the auction procedure under the Civil Execution Act for the reason that the highest bidder stated the bid price higher than the bid price that the highest bidder intended to enter by mistake (negative)

In the real estate auction procedure under the Civil Execution Act, the sale of real estate shall not be permitted unless there are any reasons provided for in the subparagraphs of Article 121 and Article 124(1) of the Civil Execution Act. The reason that the highest bidder entered the price higher than the bid price that he/she intended to enter by mistake does not constitute any of the subparagraphs of Articles 121 and 124(1) of the Civil Execution Act. Thus, the sale of real estate can not be permitted for such reason.

Articles 121 and 124(1) of the Civil Execution Act

Re-appellant

Suwon District Court Order 2009Ra166 dated December 14, 2009

The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Suwon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the order of the court below, the court below held that the decision on the rejection of the sale of this case was justifiable in light of the following: (a) the appraised value of the apartment of this case was 950,000,000, and the minimum sale price was gradually reduced due to the lack of bidders from the auction procedure of this case to the third auction date; (b) the price of the apartment of this case was 486,40,000 won at the time of the Nonparty’s highest bidding; and (c) the Nonparty’s highest bid price was 608,89,000 won at the time of the Nonparty’s highest bidding; and (d) the Nonparty filed an application for the refusal of the sale on the grounds that there was

However, in the real estate auction procedure under the Civil Execution Act, unless there are reasons provided for in the subparagraphs of Article 121 and Article 124(1) of the Civil Execution Act, the sale may not be permitted unless there are reasons provided for in the subparagraphs of Article 121 and Article 124(1) of the same Act. The reason that the highest bidder entered the price higher than the bid price that he/she intended to enter by mistake does not constitute any of the subparagraphs of Article 121 and Article 124(1) of the Civil Execution Act. Thus,

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the grounds for non-permission of sale in the real estate auction procedure, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the decision. The grounds for reappeal pointing this out are with merit.

Therefore, the order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Hong-hoon (Presiding Justice)