[1] Method of dealing with application for intervention in succession, which has defects in the requirements for intervention (=Dismissal by judgment)

[2] The case holding that the rejection of a request for intervention in succession by a presiding judge's order is illegal

[1] Article 81 of the Civil Procedure Act / [2] Article 81 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Seoul Northern District Court Order 2006Na2719 dated September 14, 2006

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

ex officio deemed.

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, the third party may apply for intervention in succession to the court in which the lawsuit is pending, specifying the purpose and reason for intervention. The above application for intervention in succession falls under a kind of institution of lawsuit and falls under the requirements for intervention, and thus the requirements for intervention are incomplete,

In light of the records, the presiding judge of the court below found that the court below ordered the re-appellant to refuse the re-appellant's application for intervention in succession during the first preparatory date for pleading (However, there is an omission in the preparation of the protocol). In the event of refusing the application for intervention in succession, the court below's order made by the presiding judge should be in the form of judgment as above, but the court below erred by violating the law and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment

Therefore, the order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Sung-tae (Presiding Justice)