Plaintiff

The plaintiff succeeding intervenor's respective claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

The Plaintiff and the Defendants.

1. The plaintiff and the plaintiff succeeding intervenor entered into a joint agreement with the plaintiff and the plaintiff to construct and sell the F building on the non-Party E and six parcels of Gyeyang-gu Incheon (hereinafter referred to as the "joint agreement of this case"). Under the agreement of this case, the plaintiff paid the defendant C the amount of KRW 60 million and the amount of KRW 30 million to the defendant D, and if the business is not performed, the defendants agreed to return the above money to the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the "agreement of this case"). Ultimately, since the joint agreement of this case was non-existent, the defendants are obligated to return the above money to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff and the plaintiff succeeding intervenor who received the right to request the return of this case from the plaintiff and the plaintiff from the plaintiff were not paid the above money to the defendants.

2. We examine the judgment on the plaintiff's claim. The plaintiff submitted a withdrawal letter of lawsuit on March 10, 2020, but did not obtain the defendants' consent. The plaintiff's transfer of right to request the return under the agreement of this case to the plaintiff's succeeding intervenor is recognized by himself. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is without merit without further review.

3. Determination as to the claim of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor

A. Defendant D’s judgment as to the application for intervention by succession was rendered on the ground that the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor acquired the right to claim a return under the instant agreement from the Plaintiff for the main purpose of procedural action, and thus, the Plaintiff’s application for intervention by succession is unlawful. Therefore, in a case where the assignment of claims is transferred mainly to the Plaintiff, Article 7 of the Trust Act applies mutatis mutandis even if the assignment of claims does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act, even if the assignment of claims does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act, and whether it is the main purpose of having the Plaintiff conduct procedural acts is determined after the transfer of claims