양수금
1. The plaintiff's successor's application for intervention shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit incurred by the succession.
1. On February 28, 2015, an intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff’s succession filed an application for intervention with the Plaintiff claiming that the Plaintiff acquired KRW 400 million from the Plaintiff’s assignee’s credit subject to the instant lawsuit. It is evident that the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor filed an application for intervention on October 29, 2015, which was after the closing of argument at the trial.
According to Article 81 of the Civil Procedure Act, a third party may intervene in a lawsuit by asserting that he/she succeeded to all or part of the rights or obligations, which are the object of the lawsuit, while the lawsuit is pending before the court. However, in cases where a request for intervention in succession is filed after the closure of pleadings, whether the pleading is resumed or not does not have the obligation to resume to the court and ex officio (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da26997, Mar. 11, 2005). Thus, unless the court does not resume the pleading, the request
It is unlawful on account of its lack of case.
2. The conclusion is that the plaintiff succeeding intervenor's motion to intervene in the succession of this case is unlawful, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.