A. The defendant's assertion that the request for intervention by the independent party of this case is unlawful (hereinafter "the defendant's clan") has the nature of the intervention by the independent party of this case against the plaintiff and the defendant's family members who are the parties of the original lawsuit, and the plaintiff's independent party intervenor has filed a claim against the defendant's clan only, so the independent party intervenor has filed a claim against the defendant's clan. Thus, the application for intervention by the independent party of this case is unlawful. However, the independent party of this case can join the independent party with both or one of the parties of the lawsuit as the other party pursuant to Article 79 of the Civil Procedure Act. In addition, since the independent party intervenor added the purport of participation to the plaintiff and the plaintiff's successor on November 27, 2012

B. An independent party intervenor asserting that the request for intervention by succession of B is unlawful, the independent party intervenor voluntarily registered himself/herself as representative director in the corporate register B by unlawful means, such as forging relevant documents, and voluntarily withdraws the application for intervention by the plaintiff and the application for intervention by succession of the plaintiff. Thus, the above application for intervention by succession is unlawful. However, the above assertion by the independent party intervenor cannot be accepted since there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion

2. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a corporation with the purpose of real estate leasing business, and the defendant clan is FC 29 G with the purpose of promoting the friendship of the members of the clan, fostering of the descendants, etc. consisting of lineal descendants of FC 29 G.

B. (1) Although the process of election of the representative of the defendant clan (1) passed a resolution to elect H as the representative of the defendant clan on March 14, 2007 by holding an extraordinary general meeting on March 14, 2007, the defendant clan in the case of the Cheongju District Court 2010Kahap269, I confirmed the invalidity of the above resolution by the Cheongju District Court 2010Kahap269 against the defendant clan.