The defendants' motion for intervention shall be dismissed.

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are supplementary participation.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Where a party intends to participate in an action to assist one of the parties in a litigation case, he/she shall have a legal interest in the result of the action;

The Defendants’ Intervenor filed an application for intervention on the ground that part of the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the claim by transfer from F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) was revoked as a fraudulent act, but the Plaintiff could not exercise the claim in subrogation of F, the obligor, and thus, the Defendants’ Intervenor could not exercise the claim in subrogation of F, the obligor.

However, this circumstance is merely a factual and economic interest and cannot be said to be a legal interest in the outcome of the instant lawsuit.

The application for intervention in the instant case is unlawful as it does not meet the requirements for participation.

2. Interpretation of a juristic act shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules, common sense of society and transaction norms, by comprehensively taking into account the contents of the text and motive of the juristic act, the motive and background leading up to the juristic act, the purpose and genuine intent to be achieved by the parties by the juristic act, transaction practices, etc., in a case where the meaning given by the parties to the juristic act is clearly decided, and the meaning of the juristic act is not clearly revealed

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da35571, May 26, 1992). As long as the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the content of the document, unless there is any counter-proof, and shall not reject it without reasonable grounds.

However, if it is recognized that there is an express or implied agreement different from the content of the disposal document, it can be recognized as different from that of the written agreement.