1. The supplementary participation of the Defendant joining the Defendant is not permitted.

2. The Intervenor’s appeal is dismissed.

3.

1. Determination as to whether to permit participation

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff, a real estate broker, filed an application for intervention in the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, the seller of real estate, seeking payment of brokerage commission pursuant to the sales contract on E forest land, E 28,682 square meters and four lots (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The Defendant entered into the instant sales contract on behalf of the Defendant on the ground of its intervention, and the Defendant agreed to handle the said sales contract without payment of brokerage commission at the time when the right of representation was granted by the Defendant. If the Defendant bears the obligation to pay brokerage commission to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is again entitled to exercise the right of reimbursement against the Defendant for damages equivalent to the above brokerage commission on the ground of breach of trust or tort beyond the scope of the right of representation. Thus, the Defendant asserts to the effect that there was an interest in the outcome of the instant lawsuit.

B. In order to decide whether to allow participation in assistance, there must be legal interests, not in fact or in economic interest with respect to the outcome of the lawsuit in question.

In this case, in order for the Intervenor to be recognized as having a legal interest as to the instant lawsuit as alleged above, it should be explained that the Intervenor first agreed with the Defendant to handle the sales contract without paying a brokerage commission when concluding the said sales contract on behalf of the Defendant. However, it is not sufficient to accept the evidence No. 3 alone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant joining the defendant seems to be the defendant's birth, and currently the defendant did not contact properly.

Therefore, the motion to intervene in the case can be recognized as the grounds for participation.