beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, excluding Plaintiff D, E, R, and S, is as shown in paragraph 2 below, in addition to adding each judgment of Plaintiff D, E, R, and S as stated in paragraph 3 below, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination as to the plaintiffs' remaining arguments except for plaintiffs D, E, R, and S
A. (i) The remainder of the Plaintiffs except Plaintiffs D, E, R, and S (hereinafter “Plaintiff T, etc.”) did not delegate the instant attorney-at-law to the Plaintiff, etc., but the attorney-at-law filed the instant lawsuit against the Plaintiff’s intent, etc., and thus, the instant lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff T, etc. by a person who has no power of attorney, is unlawful.
Luxembourg, even if the plaintiff T et al. delegated the institution of the lawsuit in this case to A attorney, the plaintiff T et al. voluntarily expressed his intention to withdraw the lawsuit in this case while the lawsuit in this case is in progress, and thus the delegation of the lawsuit in relation to A attorney-at-law was withdrawn. Thus, although A attorney-at-law did not have the right of attorney for the plaintiff T et al., A attorney-at-law performed the lawsuit and was sentenced to the judgment of the court of first instance, although A et al. did not have the right of attorney for the plaintiff T et al., the judgment of the court of first instance is defective in the procedure that has defects
Article 22(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that the Plaintiff shall file a lawsuit against the Defendant on November 2, 2016 against the same content as the instant lawsuit by Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015Da5289285, and the said judgment becomes final and conclusive. The instant lawsuit by the Plaintiff T et al. is identical to the instant case, and thus, the instant lawsuit by the Plaintiff T et al. shall be dismissed.
B. (i) A Attorney-at-law shall be subject to determination.