The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Central District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In a case where many persons having a common interest have appointed the parties, the appointed parties may conduct the lawsuit on behalf of the parties until the completion of the lawsuit in question, barring any special agreement, and thus the appointed parties may also file an appeal as such;

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Da34038 Decided November 14, 2003, Supreme Court Decision 2008Du20901 Decided January 30, 2009, etc.). Meanwhile, the party’s selection may be cancelled or changed at any time for the future. In the event that the selection has been cancelled, the party’s withdrawal does not indicate the effect of withdrawal unless the appointed party or the other party or the court notifies the other party or the court of the withdrawal of the selection (Article 63(2) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act). However, the withdrawal of the selection is not necessarily required to be explicitly or explicitly, but it is possible to do so.

In addition, the designated parties should be selected from among many persons who have a common interest, so if a lawsuit on the part of the designated parties is withdrawn or the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the designated parties shall automatically lose their qualification as the designated parties.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da28775 Decided September 28, 2006, etc.). 2. Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment reveals the following facts. A.

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants and B on the ground that the article or writing on the Plaintiff posted on the Internet media, etc. damaged the Plaintiff’s reputation.

B. The Defendants and B, upon responding thereto, appointed B as the designated party without any agreement on the limitation at the court level. The first instance court, upon the Plaintiff’s request, accepted only part of the part concerning the Defendants, and rendered a judgment dismissing both the remainder of the Defendants’ claim and the part concerning the designated party B.

(c).