배당이의
1. The successor's request for intervention shall be dismissed; and
2. The Jeonju District Court C. Gunsan Branch C.
1. According to Article 81 of the ex officio judgment on the legitimacy of the application for intervention by succession, where a third party succeeds to all or part of the right or obligation which is the object of the lawsuit while the lawsuit is pending before the court, the third party may apply for intervention by succession to the court in which the lawsuit is pending, specifying the purport of and reasons for intervention. Such application for intervention by succession constitutes a kind
A case constitutes a litigation requirement and required to participate
If there are any defects on a case, they shall be rejected by a judgment following pleadings.
(see Supreme Court Decision 2011Da85789, Apr. 26, 2012). In a case where a person acquires a right, which is the subject matter of a lawsuit prior to the institution of a lawsuit, the application for intervention by succession does not satisfy the requirements for intervention by succession, and in such a case, the
(See Supreme Court Decision 83Meu1027 Decided September 27, 1983). On January 15, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that “the Defendant received dividends as a provisional attachment right holder in the distribution procedure for D-owned real estate, but the Defendants’ claims against D have already been extinguished due to repayment, so the amount of dividends against the Defendants should be distributed to the Plaintiffs who are the applicant creditors.” On February 4, 2014, a copy of the instant complaint was delivered to the Defendant Industrial Bank of Korea by the succeeding intervenor. The succeeding intervenor asserted that the Industrial Bank of Korea’s claims against D were transferred to the Defendant, it is evident in the record that the succeeding intervenor filed a lawsuit by asserting that he/she succeeded to the acquisition by transfer under the asset acquisition agreement on October 10, 2013.”
According to the above facts of recognition, even if the succeeding intervenor's assertion is based on the succeeding intervenor's assertion, it constitutes a case where the succeeding intervenor acquired the right which is the object of the instant lawsuit before the instant lawsuit is filed, and thus the succeeding
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
(a)the indication of the claim;