B. The requirements for participation in the co-litigation

(b) Co-litigation shall be allowed to a third party only if the subject matter of the lawsuit between the other party becomes final and conclusive jointly against either party and the third party, i.e., the judgment of the lawsuit between the other party becomes effective against the third party.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the plaintiff and the co-litigants.

The summary of the above evidence No. 3-1 and No. 2 is that since the above non-party 1 made an application for registration and power of attorney with respect to the land of this case, based on these documents, and the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land of this case from the above non-party 1 to the non-party 2 et al. who is the plaintiff's title trustee, the plaintiff's title trustee 2 et al., and the defendants recognized the authenticity of these documents, the court below should recognize the authenticity of these documents as valid registration consistent with the substantive rights of the registration of ownership transfer under the above non-party 2 et al., the plaintiff's title trustee 2 et al. as to the land of this case, unless there are other special circumstances, but the court below did not have any evidence to find that the above documents were prepared by the above non-party 1, and even if the registration of the name of the non-party 2 et al. was made with the consent of the above non-party 1, it is contrary to the Supreme Court precedents and precedents on the interpretation of disposal documents.

However, even if the judgment below erred by misapprehending the interpretation of the disposition document such as the theory of lawsuit, it is nothing more than a violation of the law, and further, as the theory of lawsuit, the defendants acknowledged the authenticity of the above disposition document Gap, and it cannot be deemed that the defendants led to the confession of the plaintiff's principal, which can be recognized by the above evidence Gap, and even if there were errors in recognizing the facts contrary to the confession, this is merely a violation of the law and therefore, the argument on this point is nothing more than a mere violation of the law, and it does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal. The precedents of party members cited in the theory are not applicable to the administrative case that is not subject to the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, or the case where the appeal or the application for permission for permission for permission is granted, and it is not appropriate in this case as the case. The argument is groundless.

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below held that the intervention of the co-litigants in this case is unlawful on the ground that the plaintiff's claim for confirmation of the right to grave base and the right to claim for the registration of the establishment thereof are not legally binding on the plaintiff and the co-litigants, and that the application for intervention of the co-litigants in this case is not unlawful, because the plaintiff's claim for confirmation of the right to grave base and the right to claim for the registration of the establishment thereof are not legally binding on the plaintiff and the co-litigants. Such judgment of the court below is just and there are no errors of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to the intervention in the co-litigation, and it does not constitute any ground provided in Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which is argued that there is an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the intervention in the co-litigation

Therefore, the appeal by the plaintiff and the co-litigants is dismissed, and the costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)