1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the judgment of the first instance, K took over the lawsuit against the Plaintiff and the Defendant C.

1. The grounds for this part of the basic facts are stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

In addition to the addition of the following matters, it is identical to the description, and thus, it is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

F. After the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit, the first instance court served the Defendant C with a notice of a copy of the complaint and the date for pleading by public notice. On August 9, 2017, the first instance court concluded the pleading and sentenced the first instance judgment on September 13, 2017.

The Plaintiff appealed against Defendant C and D among the judgment of the first instance.

Since then, the Plaintiff became aware of the death of Defendant C, the appellant, around August 9, 2017, which was the date of the closing of the argument in the first instance trial, and submitted to this court a written request to resume the legal proceedings with respect to L and K (the share of inheritance shall be 1/2, respectively) as the inheritor in this Court.

On April 18, 2018, K has submitted a written answer to the substantive content disputing its obligations.

2. We examine ex officio whether the judgment of the court of first instance and the appeal of this case are lawful, and examine the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the death of Defendant C, and whether the appeal against the Plaintiff against the Defendant C is lawful.

In a case where a judgment is rendered after the interruption of litigation proceedings due to the death of one of the parties during the proceeding, and the pleading is terminated, the judgment is unlawful in the procedure that results in the exclusion of the legitimate assignee who can participate in the lawsuit, but the judgment cannot be deemed null and void as a matter of course. However, the judgment can seek its revocation through an appeal or retrial on the ground of defects in the power of representation, considering the same as the case where the judgment was not legally represented by an agent, and thus, it is only possible to seek its revocation through an appeal or retrial on the ground of defects in the power of representation. Thus, even in a case where a legitimate heir after the judgment was rendered after receiving a judgment upon request for resumption or after submitting a written appeal by a legitimate inheritor