분양대금반환 등
All appeals by the plaintiffs against the defendants are dismissed.
2. The plaintiff-joint-litigation intervenor raised by this court.
1. The judgment on the plaintiffs' claim - The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted by the main sentence of Article 4
(A) The Plaintiff’s application for intervention in the co-litigation on February 2, 1999 is justified as it does not meet the requirements of Article 83(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, and the Plaintiff’s application for intervention in the co-litigation on February 2, 1999, where the purpose of the lawsuit is to be determined jointly with one of the parties and a third party (the co-litigants) (the intervenor) (the intervenor’s assertion itself is, the purpose of the lawsuit is to be determined jointly with the Plaintiff and the intervenor. As such, the Intervenor’s application for intervention in the co-litigation is unlawful as it does not meet the requirements of Article 83(1) of
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, and all appeals filed against the Defendants are dismissed as it is without merit. The Intervenor’s application for intervention in the co-litigation filed by this court is unlawful and it is not possible to correct the defects. Thus, the judgment is dismissed without holding any pleadings pursuant to Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act.