1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. Of the lawsuits filed by an independent party, 1/6.0 each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet.

1. The scope of the trial in this Court’s lawsuit for intervention of the independent party is the form of litigation in which the plaintiff, defendant, and intervenor resolve without contradiction in the same legal relationship in a lump sum, and the intervention of the independent party is lawful, and when an independent party is deemed to render a judgment on the merits of the lawsuit between the plaintiff, defendant, and intervenor, a final judgment ordering the above three parties to the lawsuit in the name of the above three parties to a final judgment shall be rendered, thereby making a joint and conclusive conclusion between the above three parties. In the event one party appeals to the judgment on the merits, the final judgment of the first instance shall be interrupted, and the whole

In such a case, the subject matter of the appellate trial is limited to the scope of objection expressed in the purport of the appeal by the person who actually filed the appeal, but the scope of the trial shall be determined by considering the necessity of the unity of the conclusion between the above three parties. Accordingly, in the case of setting the conclusion through a deliberation and decision in the appellate trial, if necessary for the unity of the conclusion between the above three parties, it shall not be excluded that the judgment is changed to the contents more favorable than the judgment of the first instance.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da86573, 86580, Oct. 26, 2007). In this case, in the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for cancellation of the ownership transfer registration, and the independent party intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the “participating”) filed a claim for confirmation of ownership against the Plaintiff upon filing an application for intervention by an independent party for the prevention of death. The first instance court dismissed the Intervenor’s application for intervention, accepted the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant, and only the Intervenor appealed against the Plaintiff.

However, as seen below, the intervenor's claim is justified, and it is accepted.