유체동산인도
1. The independent party intervenor's appeal against the plaintiff and the defendant YTN Co., Ltd. is dismissed in entirety;
2...
1. The reasons why the court should explain this case are added to the end of the 7th judgment of the court of first instance, which is set forth in Paragraph 2 below. In addition to adding the decision on the application for intervention by the court of first instance as set forth in Paragraph 3 below, it is identical to the part on Defendant YN Co., Ltd., for the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420
2. Additional part (the intervenor asserts to the effect that since each movable listed in the separate sheet No. 1 can be transferred only by the delivery of a bill of lading, the plaintiff who did not receive the bill of lading cannot acquire ownership of the said movable property. However, even if the intervenor's assertion is based on the intervenor's bill of lading, the above argument is denied the plaintiff's right, and it is not permissible since it does not claim the plaintiff's right that cannot be compatible with it.)
3. Judgment on the Intervenor’s motion for intervention by this Court
A. Although the intervenor's assertion that the plaintiff's assertion is not true, the defendants do not confession or perform a litigation on the main part of the plaintiff's assertion. The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case was filed for the purpose of excluding other creditors against the defendants rather than the means of realizing the plaintiff's own rights or securing legal status. The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is filed for the purpose of excluding the plaintiff's rights and legal status. As a result of this lawsuit, there is a concern that the plaintiff's rights and legal status of the intervenor or defendant corporation may be infringed
B. Among the participation of the independent party to the judgment, the participation in the prevention of corruption is objectively recognized as having the intent to harm the intervenor of the independent party through the lawsuit in question, and the result of the lawsuit is likely to infringe on the rights or legal status of the independent party to the lawsuit.