Whether the litigation proceedings are suspended in case where the defendant died while the lawsuit is pending, and one of several co-inheritors has proceeded with the procedure by filing a lawsuit.

As long as a necessary co-inheritors is not a necessary co-litigation, the defendant's co-inheritors who died may file an application for continuation separately.

Articles 211 and 75 of the Civil Procedure Act

Kim Sung-Ha

Mangno-si

Decree of Transition;

Military production support in the first instance court, and Jeonju District Court Decision 61Na1860 delivered on October 26, 1962

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant's grounds of appeal are as shown in the annexed appellate brief attached to the defendant.

Judgment on ground of appeal No. 1

According to a certified copy of the family register of the head of family (82), which is bound in the records, the former defendant's Masan-si, a lineal descendant, was deceased on August 11, 1960. This case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's removal and case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case's case'.

Judgment on the Second Ground of Appeal

There is no illegality in the court below's holding that even if there are defects such as the defendant's main owner in the purchase of the building site by the plaintiff, the plaintiff shall be deemed a legitimate owner unless the disposition against the plaintiff is revoked, and there is no argument that the above sale disposition is invalid as a matter of course.

Judgment on the third ground for appeal

The court below is just to have determined that the plaintiff's request for removal of the building and delivery of the site cannot be seen as an abuse of rights, and it is not possible to employ the arguments that attack the original judgment on the opposite opinion.

Judgment on the fourth Ground of Appeal

The court below, based on evidence, acknowledged the fact that the defendant possessed 48 square meters in whole on the site of this case, and there is no question about the recognition of the amount of damages and the uncertainty of the site of occupation.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

The judges of the Supreme Court, both judges (Presiding Judge) and Magyeong, Mag-Jak, the highest leapble leapbal of Red Mags