In a case where the intervenor joining the defendant submitted the petition of appeal after the period of appeal by the defendant expired, whether it is legitimate (=applicable law)

Since the defendant’s assistant intervenor cannot conduct litigation which cannot be conducted by the defendant’s intervenor according to the progress of litigation at the time of intervention, from the time when the original copy of the judgment was served on the defendant’s assistant intervenor in case where the defendant’s assistant intervenor submitted a petition of appeal, if the period of appeal has already expired in relation to the defendant, who is the defendant’s assistant intervenor, even if the original copy of the judgment was served on the defendant’s assistant intervenor,

Articles 76(1) and 396(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 69Da949 Decided August 19, 1969 (No. 17-3, 23)

Plaintiff

Guri-si

A bankrupt medical corporation, a trustee in bankruptcy of the Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Foundation, who is a trustee in bankruptcy of the Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Foundation;

Intervenor 2

Seoul High Court Decision 2006Na45956 decided May 18, 2007

The appeal shall be dismissed. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the bankrupt-related medical corporation, the bankrupt-related medical corporation organized by the bankruptcy trustee of the Maritime Medical Foundation, and the bankrupt-related medical corporation, the bankruptcy trustee of the Maritime Medical Foundation.

We examine ex officio.

The defendant assistant intervenor cannot conduct any procedural acts which cannot be conducted by the original party in accordance with the degree of the progress of the lawsuit at the time when the defendant assistant intervenor participated (proviso of Article 76 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act). If the defendant assistant intervenor submits a petition of appeal from the time when the original copy of judgment was served on the defendant assistant intervenor, even if it is within the period of appeal, if the period of appeal has already expired in relation to the defendant who is the original party, the appeal by the defendant assistant intervenor also becomes effective after the lapse of the period of appeal, and the appeal by the defendant assistant intervenor is unlawful (see Supreme Court Decision 69Da949, Aug.

In light of the above legal principles and the records, the date when the original copy of the judgment of the court below was served on May 29, 2007, and the date when the bankrupt was served on the bankrupt medical corporation, a bankruptcy trustee of the Maritime Medical Foundation, a bankruptcy trustee of the Maritime Medical Foundation, a bankruptcy trustee of the Maritime Medical Foundation, a bankruptcy trustee of the Maritime Medical Foundation (hereinafter “Defendant Intervenor’s Intervenor”) who constituted the Maritime Medical Foundation, on June 4, 2007, and on June 14, 2007, it can be known that the date when the defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s bankruptcy trustee submitted the petition of this case was submitted on June 14, 2007. Since it is apparent that the petition of this case was submitted after the expiration of the period of appeal by the defendant, the final appeal of this case

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and the costs of appeal shall be borne by the intervenor assisting the defendant in bankruptcy, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Ji-hyung (Presiding Justice)