1. The counterclaim of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit resulting from an additional judgment shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. The Defendant filed the instant counterclaim on September 15, 2014, and this Court rendered a judgment only on October 23, 2014, which rendered a judgment on the instant counterclaim. As such, an additional judgment on the instant counterclaim ought to be rendered.

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. Defendant B’s assertion 1) Although Defendant B did not have an obligation against the Plaintiff, Defendant B did not make any obligation against the Plaintiff and prepared the Plaintiff’s husband No. 1 (notarial deed No. 2583, 2004) by falsity, and thus, Defendant C, a partner of Defendant B, prepared the Plaintiff’s No. 2 (notarial deed No. 2267, 2006) for Defendant B, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B was extinguished.

B. On its ex officio determination, Article 269(1) main text of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “A defendant may file a counterclaim with the court in which the principal lawsuit is pending before the closure of the pleadings only when it does not delay litigation procedures significantly.” Thus, a counterclaim filed after the closure of the pleadings is unlawful.

However, the counterclaim of this case was filed on September 15, 2014, which was after the pleading against the principal lawsuit was concluded on August 28, 2014, and thus, it is inappropriate and deemed that it constitutes a case where the defect cannot be corrected, and thus, it shall be dismissed without holding any pleadings pursuant to Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. If so, the defendant's counterclaim of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.