[건물철거][집2(5)민,009]
Suspension of proceedings and the establishment of new public prosecution
With respect to the establishment of prosecution during the interruption of the procedure, if the accused does not raise an objection and continues the litigation without stating an objection, the right to write down shall be lost.
Article 141 of the Civil Procedure Act
The plaintiff's legal representative and the administrator of Lee Dong-jin
[Defendant 4] Kim Jong-sung, Attorney Kim Jong-sung, Counsel for defendant 1-appellee
Seoul District Court of the first instance, the Seoul High Court of the second instance, 53 civilian 113 delivered on June 30, 1954
The final appeal is dismissed.
Costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant, etc.
The grounds of appeal by the defendant et al. asserted that the plaintiff's administrator as the plaintiff's plaintiff's administrator as the defense of safety had lost legal representation right by a decision of January 30 of the second year of the mobilization of the provisional disposition case No. 687 of the Seoul District Court's short-term civil petition No. 687, and this lawsuit has been interrupted. However, even if the plaintiff's legal representative's right has expired, the plaintiff's legal representative's right of representation is not interrupted. Therefore, although the second instance court explained that the second instance court's legal representative's right of representation was groundless, the second instance court's legal representative's withdrawal of the lawsuit (No. 112, the second instance court's legal representative's withdrawal of the provisional disposition No. 1320, the second instance court's legal representative's withdrawal of the provisional disposition No. 4287, and the second instance court's legal representative's withdrawal of the provisional disposition No. 1370, Dec. 13, 428.
According to the records of the first instance court's case, the plaintiff's administrator of this case submitted a provisional disposition prohibiting the exercise of the right to manage property on January 30, 4287 to the plaintiff's administrator of this case before the service of the first instance court, which was filed on January 13 of the records. Thus, since Article 213 of the Civil Procedure Act does not apply to the second instance court's delivery of the first instance court's judgment, and the second instance court's rejection of this case's right to legal representation cannot be seen as suspended due to the loss of this right to legal representation, it is improper that the court below's judgment did not suspend the proceedings pursuant to Article 213 of the Civil Procedure Act, but it cannot be seen that the plaintiff's legal representative's acceptance of this case's provisional disposition of this case cannot be seen as being valid for two years or more, and it cannot be viewed as the plaintiff's withdrawal of this case's legal representative's right to legal representation after the second instance court's rejection of this case's judgment.
Therefore, the appeal of this case is without merit and it is so decided as per Disposition by Articles 401, 89, and 95 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Justices Kim Jong-il (Presiding Justice) Acting Justice Kim Jae-ho on the present allotment of Kim Dong-dong