1. The plaintiff's successor's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff.

Plaintiff

With respect to the legality of an succeeding intervenor’s application for intervention, a successor’s participation is a requirement for succession to the right or obligation that is the object of the lawsuit to be participated (see Article 81 of the Civil Procedure Act and the purport of the Supreme Court Decisions 83Meu1027, Sept. 27, 1983). The period during which the lawsuit has been pending is when the complaint, etc. was served on the Defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da12517, Nov. 25, 1994; 94Da12524, Mar. 27, 2014). The lawsuit of this case was filed on March 27, 2014; a duplicate of the complaint was filed against the Defendant A and C; and it is evident that the facts reached March 29, 2016 with the Defendant B, and the fact that the Plaintiff’s successor’s application for intervention did not meet the requirements for succession to the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff’s successor.

(A) The Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor submitted an application for intervention on July 18, 2016, which was after the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor delivered a duplicate of complaint to the Defendants. Thus, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor’s application for intervention shall be dismissed. Accordingly, the judgment of the first instance is just and without merit, and all of the appeals of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.