1. The instant lawsuit filed by Plaintiff A and B was concluded on October 5, 2014 as the withdrawal of the lawsuit.

2. The plaintiff (appointed party) C's objection.

1. Determination as to the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff A and B

A. The following facts are apparent in the records:

1) Plaintiff A and B were absent on the date of the first pleading on July 17, 2014, and September 4, 2014, respectively, on the date of the second pleading on September 2, 2014, and the Defendant’s attorney was present on the said date of the first pleading, but did not present the said Plaintiffs, and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) was absent on the said date of the second pleading on October 13, 2014.

B. Article 268 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that even if both parties are not present at the date of pleading or present at the court on the date of pleading, if both parties do not present at the court on the date of pleading, the presiding judge shall again notify the parties thereof by designating the date of pleading (Paragraph (1) and that even if both parties are present at the court on the new date of pleading under paragraph (1) or on the date of pleading opened thereafter, if both parties do not present at the court or present at the court on the subsequent date of pleading, the lawsuit shall be deemed to have been withdrawn unless they do so within one month (Paragraph (2). (2) As examined in the above facts of recognition, as seen in the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff A and B were absent at the first date of pleading, and the Defendant’s attorney did not present at the court on September 4, 2014, which is the second date of pleading and notified again, and the said Plaintiffs did not appear at the defendant’s attorney on the date of pleading.

[Plaintiff (Appointed Party) submitted to this court a letter of appointment of the party as the Claimant A and B after the second date for pleading, and it can be prejudicial to Plaintiff A and B’s submission of the above letter of appointment of the party to this court. However, as seen above, the fact that the time when the party appointment was submitted is October 13, 2014, after one month from the second date for pleading, is the same as seen earlier.]

The theory of conclusion is theory.