beta
Text
1. The defendant succeeding intervenor's application for intervention shall be dismissed;
2. The defendant shall provide the plaintiff with the attached list.
Reasons
1. Around November 12, 2014, the Defendant succeeding intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the “participating”) filed an application for intervention in succession by asserting that the Defendant’s claim against the non-party limited liability company (hereinafter referred to as the “industry”) was acquired from the non-party mentor loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “non-party mentor”) around November 12, 2014.
According to Article 81 of the Civil Procedure Act, in case where a third party succeeds to all or part of the right or obligation, which is the object of a lawsuit, while the lawsuit is pending before the court, such third party may apply for intervention in succession to the court in which the lawsuit is pending. Such application for intervention in succession constitutes a kind of lawsuit
A case constitutes a litigation requirement and required to participate
If there is any defect in a case, the application for intervention shall be rejected by a judgment following pleadings.
(See Supreme Court Decision 201Da85789 Decided April 26, 2012). The fact that the instant lawsuit was filed on November 30, 2016 and the duplicate of the complaint was served on the Defendant on December 12, 2016 is apparent in the record, and even according to the assertion itself, the Intervenor acquired the Defendant’s claim against the industry even a non-party limited liability company prior to the instant lawsuit’s continuation, and thus, the instant application for intervention decided its requirements.
Therefore, the Intervenor’s application for intervention by succession is unlawful.
2. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the merits of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), the plaintiff has the same tax claim as stated in the following table Nos. 1, while the industry was granted a loan from the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives on May 8, 1996, and the plaintiff completed the registration of creation of neighboring mortgage (hereinafter "registration of creation of neighboring mortgage of this case") or the mortgage of this case as stated in the attached table No. 1 to secure this.