The plaintiffs' lawsuit against the defendant was terminated on November 24, 2020 by withdrawal of the lawsuit.

after the completion of a lawsuit.

On October 28, 2020, the plaintiffs submitted a written withdrawal of the lawsuit to this court on October 28, 2020, and its duplicate was served on the defendant's representative on November 9, 2020, and it is evident that the defendant did not raise any objection within two weeks thereafter.

On January 14, 2021, the defendant's attorney stated that the withdrawal of the plaintiffs' lawsuit does not have any different objection.

However, on October 28, 2020, the Defendant’s Intervenor submitted a written consent to the withdrawal of the lawsuit to this court on October 28, 2020, and claimed the validity of the withdrawal of the lawsuit on December 4, 2020.

In this case, the Intervenor, the Defendant’s Intervenor, was the assignee of the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer with respect to Sejong-type Special Self-Governing City, 1379,9 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Defendant, and the Plaintiffs, the owners of the sections for exclusive use of the building constructed on the instant land, participated in the instant lawsuit against the Defendant on the ground that there was an interest in the outcome of the instant lawsuit seeking the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the portion of the land owned by the Plaintiff’s portion for exclusive use of the instant land. The participation by the Defendant Intervenor, the assignee of the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant land, which is merely the assignee of the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer, is merely a simple participation rather than a co-litigation that is permissible in a case where the effect of the judgment affects the Intervenor. Moreover, the Intervenor’s participation cannot be said to be an act against the part of the Intervenor (Article 76(2) of the Civil Procedure Act). The Defendant Intervenor, the only mere assistant intervenor, cannot be withdrawn against the Defendant’s consent.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' lawsuit against the defendant was terminated on November 23, 2020 after the expiration of the period of objection, which was November 23, 2020.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' lawsuit against the defendant was terminated by the withdrawal of the plaintiffs' lawsuit, and the defendant's supplementary intervenor disputes the validity of the withdrawal of the lawsuit.