beta
Text
The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. In a case where many persons having a common interest have appointed the parties, the appointed parties may conduct the lawsuit on behalf of the parties until the completion of the lawsuit in question, barring any special agreement, and thus the appointed parties may also file an appeal as such;
(1) Article 63(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a party’s selection may be cancelled or changed at any time for the future. On the other hand, where a party withdraws the selection, the party’s selection may not be cancelled or changed at any time for the future. If the appointed party or the party fails to notify the other party or the court of the withdrawal of the selection, then the withdrawal cannot be asserted (Article 63(2) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act). However, the withdrawal of the selection must not be explicitly stated, but it should be seen that the withdrawal of the selection
(see, i.e., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da31513, Oct. 15, 2015). Moreover, the Appointeds should be selected from among many persons having a common interest. As such, in cases where a joint interest relationship terminates due to the withdrawal of a lawsuit against the Appointeds or the final judgment becomes final and conclusive, the Appointeds lose their qualification as the Appointeds automatically.
2. On September 28, 2006, the court below decided that the appeal of this case filed by the Defendant, A, and B was unlawful since it was filed by a person who has no authority to conduct the lawsuit, and thus dismissed the Defendant’s appeal, based on the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant, A, and B responded to the claim for reimbursement of this case filed by the Plaintiff; (b) the designated party was selected as the designated party; and (c) the Defendant or the designated party A notified the other party or the court of the withdrawal of the selection from the time of filing an appeal against the judgment against the judgment against the first instance judgment against which the Defendant or the designated party A lost the entire judgment of the first instance.
3. However, the above determination by the court below is for the following reasons.