In case of failure to state taxes and other public imposts in the public notice of the date of auction;

The mistake that did not enter the matters concerning taxes and other public imposts of the immovables at the public notice of the date of auction is a reason for not allowing ex officio a successful bid.

Article 618 subparag. 2 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Daegu District Court Decision 66Ra75 delivered on November 12, 1966

The original decision shall be reversed, and the first instance decision shall be revoked.

This case does not permit the successful bid.

The second ground of reappeal is examined.

According to the provisions of Article 31 of the Auction Act, the notice of auction date shall state the taxes and other public imposts of the auction real estate stipulated in Article 618 subparagraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act, and according to the provisions of Article 633 subparagraph 4 of the Civil Procedure Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to the voluntary auction of real estate by Article 33 of the Auction Act and the main sentence of Article 634 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act which applies mutatis mutandis to the voluntary auction of real estate by Article 33 of the Auction Act, the notice of auction date does not state the above taxes and other public imposts ex officio. It is a ground for not granting the successful bid ex officio. Although the notice of auction date of the auction court of the auction on May 30, 1966, which issued the auction of the real estate by the record was pointed out without stating any tax and other public imposts of the real estate, it is not erroneous that the court below erred in its illegality. Thus, the issue is justified.

Therefore, the reappeal of this case is justified, and the decision of the first instance is revoked ex officio, and the adjudication of the first instance is not permitted. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Na-man (Presiding Judge)