1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on May 16, 2013 as the withdrawal of the lawsuit.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the completion of the lawsuit.

1. On May 16, 2013, when the instant lawsuit is pending, the written withdrawal of the instant lawsuit in the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “written withdrawal of the instant lawsuit”) was submitted to the instant court on May 16, 2013 under the name of the Plaintiff to the effect that “the withdrawal of the instant lawsuit is in force” (hereinafter “written withdrawal of the instant lawsuit”). The fact that the Defendants were served with the written withdrawal of the instant lawsuit on and after May 21, 2013 is obvious that the Defendants did not raise any objection to the present time.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the withdrawal of the instant lawsuit is not based on the Plaintiff’s own intent, but is drafted and submitted in collusion with Defendant B, etc., and eventually, the withdrawal of the instant lawsuit is null and void in accordance with the

B. The Plaintiff’s action of withdrawal of the lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff to extinguish the continuation of the lawsuit is the litigation for the Plaintiff’s court, and the litigation is a litigation for the extinguishment of the lawsuit, unlike the act under general private law, the existence of validity is determined based on its indication rather than the intention

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Da6124, Jun. 27, 1997; 95Da11740, Oct. 24, 1997). In addition, the designated party is granted a comprehensive authorization for performing a lawsuit from the designated party, and the designated party is able to perform any and all acts necessary for performing a lawsuit as well as any other acts under the private law, and the individual consent of the designated party is not required in conducting individual litigation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da10748 delivered on May 30, 2003, etc.). C.

Judgment

Based on the above legal principles, it is not enough to recognize the plaintiff's assertion even based on the health team, Gap evidence Nos. 10 to 13, and the result of the plaintiff's personal examination.

Rather, in full view of the results of the Plaintiff’s questioning and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression is attached to the withdrawal of the instant lawsuit. The fact that the Plaintiff received the said certificate of personal seal impression, and the seal affixed to the Plaintiff’s name on the withdrawal of the instant lawsuit