1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant brought a lawsuit against C and D regarding the real estate stated in the separate sheet as the Suwon-si Support 2013Kadan12035 against D, and won the building name map, etc., and C appealed appealed, but the said judgment was dismissed, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

B. On June 23, 2014, the Defendant applied for the grant of the succeeding execution clause to the Plaintiff (designated parties; hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) and the designated parties, and the succeeding execution clause was granted on June 23, 2014. On August 28, 2014, the execution clause became impossible on the ground that the possessor was different in the possession relationship as a third party, although the enforcement was commenced under the Suwon District Court Ansan Branch Branch Branch 2014No1872, but the possessor was not in possession relationship as a third party, and the said succeeding execution clause was revoked on October 8, 2014 by Suwon District Court Decision 2014Kao1547, Suwon District Court Decision 2014.

[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 6 to 10 (including a tentative number)

2. A lawsuit of demurrer against a third party, inasmuch as a lawsuit of demurrer against a third party is filed after the compulsory execution concerned is completed, or a lawsuit of demurrer against a third party is filed, and is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit, in case where a compulsory execution against a third party, which exists at the time when the lawsuit of demurrer against a third party is pending, is pending, in such case as a lawsuit of demurrer against a third party is filed, or a compulsory execution against which the third party exists at

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da37176, Nov. 22, 1996). Compulsory execution for which the Plaintiff and the designated parties seek exclusion by the instant lawsuit was impossible on the ground that the possession relationship was different on August 28, 2014. The fact that the Defendant withdrawn and terminated a compulsory execution application on September 15, 2014 is obvious to this court, and thus, the lawsuit by the third party of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

3. The instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.