On November 20, 1997, the facts that the intervenor filed an application for intervention in this case to participate in the lawsuit claiming the ownership transfer registration of 97Gahap3347, which was pending between the plaintiff and the defendants on November 20, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "the lawsuit claiming intervention in this case"). The facts that the lawsuit claiming intervention in this case is obvious in the record, and the lawsuit claiming intervention in this case against the defendant A is not resumed after the closure of argument as of November 21, 1997, and the facts that the judgment accepting the plaintiff's claim of November 21, 1997 is obvious in the court.

However, an independent party intervention may be deemed to be at the time when a lawsuit is pending at the fact-finding court, and in case where an application for intervention is filed after the closure of arguments at the fact-finding court, it shall be deemed to be unlawful unless the pleading is resumed. The intervenor's application for intervention at this case was submitted after the closure of arguments at the time of the conclusion of the lawsuit, and its conclusion

There is no choice but to regard it as an illegal application for participation.

If so, the motion for participation in the case

As a result, it is unlawful to decide to dismiss it, and it is so decided as per Disposition.