A Study on the Attribution of Ownership of Auctioned Real Estate when the Auction Procedure is invalidated in the Rehabilitation Procedure after full Payment of the Sale Price in Real Estate Auction

In practice, it is often difficult to achieve the purpose of the rehabilitation procedure by ignoring the uniqueness of the rehabilitation procedure and applying the provisions on the Civil Execution Act by analogy. A typical example is a case where the buyer paid the sale price in full and acquired ownership of the auction real estate under Article 135 of the Civil Execution Act, but the above auction procedure was suspended due to the decision to commence the rehabilitation procedure under the Debtor Rehabilitation Act before the end of the dividend procedure. In this situation, if there is a decision to approve the rehabilitation plan after the decision to commence the rehabilitation procedure, the auction procedure is retroactively invalidated. The question is whether the buyer still acquires ownership of the auction object, if the auction procedure is retroactively invalidated, If auctioned real estate is needed for the debtor's rehabilitation, the attribution of ownership of the auction object has a great influence on the success of the rehabilitation procedure. Currently, there is no Supreme Court ruling on the attribution of ownership of the auction object, causing a lot of confusion in the practice of rehabilitation procedures. In light of the provisions of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act and the purpose of the rehabilitation procedure, this paper argued that it is not appropriate for the buyer to acquire ownership of the auction object.