청구이의의 소
1. The application for intervention by the defendant succeeding intervenor shall be dismissed;
2. The plaintiff's lawsuit shall be dismissed.
3. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.
1. According to Article 81 of the Civil Procedure Act ex officio determination on the legitimacy of the succeeding intervenor’s motion for intervention, 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, such third party may apply for intervention in succession to the court in which the lawsuit is pending. Such application for intervention in succession constitutes a kind of lawsuit
A case constitutes a litigation requirement and required to participate
If there is any defect in a case, the request for intervention shall be rejected by a judgment following pleadings.
According to the assertion by the succeeding intervenor, the succeeding intervenor acquired the claim under the judgment of this case on February 27, 2019, prior to the continuation of the lawsuit of this case through D, etc., and thus, the succeeding intervenor itself was on the ground that he succeeded to the right, which is the object of the lawsuit prior to the continuation of the lawsuit of this case. Thus, the succeeding intervenor’s motion for participation in this case was based on the
It is unlawful on account of its lack of case.
2. Where an ex officio claim on the executive title of judgment on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit is transferred and the requisites for setting up against the assignee are met, the standing to be a party to the execution shall be changed to the assignee, and the execution obligee becomes final and conclusive as the assignee according to the intention to obtain the succession execution clause. As such, the executory power of the existing executive title against
Therefore, the claim objection suit filed against the transferor after the transfer execution clause was granted to the transferee is unlawful because it is a lawsuit filed against the non-qualified person, or seeks to exclude the executory power of the title which has already been extinguished, without any benefit of protection of rights.
(Supreme Court Decision 2005Da23889 Decided February 1, 2008) comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the statement No. 2 of the evidence No. 2 of this case, the defendant transferred his claim to D and had the requisite for setting up against the defendant and thereby, the standing to be the executive party to the above judgment shall be E from the defendant.