Seoul High Court Decision 200Na11446 decided May 1, 200

Applicant for intervention in the plaintiff's assistant (Attorney Kim Jong-sik, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

The Governor of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province (Attorney Kang Jin-hun, Counsel for defendant)

Jeju Broadcasting Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Searchra, Attorneys Go Sung-sung et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

April 25, 2018

Jeju District Court Decision 2016Guhap5222 Decided November 1, 2017

1. No application for intervention by the plaintiff's assistant participant is permitted;

2. The part of the plaintiff's primary claim added by this court shall be dismissed.

3. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

4. The part arising from the Plaintiff’s motion for intervention shall be borne by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, and the other part of the lawsuit cost after the appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On January 20, 2016, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked. In the first instance, it is confirmed that the defendant's succession to the status of newspaper enterpriser against the defendant joining the defendant on January 20, 2016 and the registration of change to the newspaper business (hereinafter "instant disposition") is invalid. In the first instance, the disposition in this case was revoked (the plaintiff added the primary claim in the trial and changed the claim in the first instance trial to the preliminary claim

1. Determination as to the application for participation by the plaintiff assistant participant

In order to intervene in a specific litigation case in order to assist one of the parties, there must be an interest in the result of the pertinent litigation. The interest here refers to a legal interest, not in fact an interest in economic, or emotional knowledge, and the existence of such an interest refers to a case in which res judicata or executory power of the relevant judgment is granted, or where the judgment does not directly affect the effect of the relevant lawsuit, at least a case in which the legal status of a person who intends to participate in an assistance is determined on the premise of such judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da19156, Apr. 26, 2007, etc.).

The plaintiff supplementary intervenor (hereinafter referred to as the "applicant") is the shareholder and creditor of the Jeju Assistant Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the " Jeju Assistant Corporation"), and the disposition of this case constitutes a direct decision on the existence of the Jeju Assistant Corporation. The disposition of this case is a disposition that directly affects the existence of the Jeju Assistant Corporation, and the assets, such as the right to publish newspapers, such as the right to publish newspapers, are transferred to the defendant's future, making it impossible for the applicant to enforce compulsory execution. The applicant asserts that the applicant has an interest in the lawsuit of this case seeking confirmation or revocation of the disposition of this case, and thus, has an interest in the lawsuit of

The records on the evidence No. 23 alone are insufficient to recognize that the applicant is the shareholder of the Jeju Assistantian, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, and it cannot be deemed that the instant disposition against the Intervenor joining the Defendant directly affects the existence of the Jeju Assistant Assistant. The records on the evidence No. 21 are acknowledged as the fact that the applicant is the creditor of the Jeju Assistantian. The instant disposition is limited to the fact that the Defendant reported the succession of the status of the business operator and the changes in the registered matters under the Act on the Promotion of Newspapers, Etc. (hereinafter “Examination Act”), and it is merely that the Defendant accepted the instant disposition by reporting the succession of the status and the changes in registered matters under the Act on the Promotion of Newspapers, Etc., and the Jeju Assistant assistant’s title, etc. is transferred by the instant disposition or does not take effect by the instant disposition. Therefore, the grounds for applying for intervention as claimed by the applicant are nothing more than the interests in economic, economic, or emotional evidence, and the applicant cannot be deemed as having legal interest in the outcome of

If so, the applicant's motion to intervene in the case is without merit, it shall not be permitted.

2. Judgment on the merits

(a) Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: (a) with respect to the allegations raised by the Plaintiff in the trial and the primary claims added in the trial; and (b) the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Additional determination

1) Determination on the assertion regarding standing to sue

A) The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff is a shareholder and creditor of the Jeju Assistant, and the disposition of this case constitutes a disposition directly affecting the existence of the Jeju Assistant, and the disposition of this case makes it impossible for the plaintiff to proceed with compulsory execution as the assets, such as the right to publish the newspaper publication, etc., were transferred to the defendant joining the defendant. The plaintiff has a legal interest in seeking confirmation or revocation of the disposition of this case against the defendant joining the defendant. Accordingly, the plaintiff has standing to sue to institute the lawsuit of this case.

B) Determination

In light of the records on the evidence No. 22, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff is a shareholder of the Jeju Youth, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, and the instant disposition against the Intervenor joining the Defendant cannot be viewed as a disposition directly affecting the existence of the Jeju Youth.

Next, according to the evidence Nos. 19 and 20 evidence Nos. 19 and 20, the non-party (the non-party 2) is the creditor of the Jeju Assistant, and the plaintiff's acquisition of the claim against the non-party's Jeju Assistant on March 28, 2018 is recognized, but the disposition in this case is merely accepted by the defendant by reporting the succession to the status of the business operator and the changes in the registered matters under the Newspapers Act, and the disposition in this case was not transferred by the contract between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and the plaintiff's right to title Nos. 19 and 20 is not transferred by the contract between the plaintiff and the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and the above contract becomes effective by the disposition in this case. Accordingly, the above title No. 1 and 20 are invalidated or revoked, and the plaintiff's right to claim the plaintiff's compulsory execution is not allowed. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion in this case's grounds alleged by the plaintiff cannot be viewed as having legal interest in seeking confirmation or revocation

2) Judgment as to the main claim

Although the Plaintiff primarily sought confirmation of the invalidity of the instant disposition in the trial, as seen above, there is no legal interest in seeking confirmation of the invalidity of the instant disposition, and as such, the Plaintiff’s primary claim seeking confirmation of the invalidity of the instant disposition is also unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the part of the main claim added by the plaintiff in the trial is unlawful, and the conjunctive claim is also dismissed. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-hoon (Presiding Judge) and Lee Jin-hun