1. The application for joint intervention by the intervenor of plaintiff co-litigation changed in this court shall be dismissed;

2...

1. As to the legitimacy of a motion for intervention in a co-litigation, a judgment shall be allowed to a third party only when the subject matter of the lawsuit between the other party and the third party is determined jointly with the other party (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da13013, Jul. 13, 2001). In addition, it cannot be deemed that the judgment of this case where the plaintiff seeks to refuse compulsory execution against the defendant against the defendant pursuant to the final judgment of this case is effective against the intervenor, and it cannot be deemed that the lawsuit between the plaintiff and the intervenor or between the defendant and the intervenor requires a joint confirmation.

Therefore, the Intervenor’s application for intervention in the co-litigation changed in this court is unlawful as it does not meet the requirements for intervention.

2. The defendant's grounds for appeal on the principal lawsuit (absent of the judgment of the court of first instance) are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and in light of the evidence submitted in the court of first instance, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

3. In conclusion, the Intervenor’s motion to intervene in the co-litigation changed in this court is unlawful and thus dismissed.

The plaintiff's claim shall be accepted as reasonable. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed.