청구이의
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. As to the instant case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance, the reasoning of this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition or dismissal of the pertinent parts, such as “the addition or dismissal of the said parts” as stated below. Thus, this case is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the
2.The addition or height of the decision of the court of first instance shall add the following between the 5th, 10 and 11 of the decision:
On the other hand, on December 30, 2015, when the lawsuit of the court of first instance was pending, the Plaintiff again received a decision to commence rehabilitation proceedings by the Daejeon District Court 2015dan524, and the Plaintiff, a debtor for rehabilitation, filed an application for the lawsuit on April 20, 2016 as a custodian pursuant to Article 74(4) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act.
As the decision to discontinue the rehabilitation procedure was finalized on October 25, 2016 regarding the above rehabilitation case, the issue of whether the Plaintiff again filed a request for the continuation of a lawsuit in the civil procedure for filing a lawsuit at the trial court on February 9, 2017 should be determined based not on the form, such as the title of the relevant application form, but on the basis of its substance. Thus, even if the form of a request for the correction of the indication of the party is made, if the purport of the request for the correction is applicable to the request for resumption,
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da113226, Nov. 27, 2014). Therefore, the Plaintiff’s legal representative is deemed to have filed an application for the correction of a party indication submitted on February 9, 2017.
AB made it.
[Attachment 5] Of the 12th sentence of the first instance judgment, the phrase “Seoul District Court 2013 Godan253, Jan. 18, 2013” is deemed to read “Seoul District Court 2013 Godan253, Feb. 4, 2015.” The following is added between the 10th sentence 5 and the 6th sentence of the first instance judgment. The Plaintiff asserted from the preparatory document of March 21, 2016 to the effect that the Plaintiff was only I and Defendant C at the office of notary public D and D office of June 11, 200, and I claimed from the relevant criminal case by Defendant C.