1. The independent party intervenor's appeal is dismissed;

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the intervenor of the independent party.

1. The part of the judgment of the first instance, which accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on the merits and rejected the Intervenor’s application for intervention as an independent party (hereinafter “application for intervention”), was appealed only by the Intervenor, and the confirmation of the Plaintiff’s claim was also interrupted, and thus, was transferred to the trial.

However, as seen below, as long as the first instance court’s decision is maintained in relation to the legitimacy of the application for intervention, the conclusion between the Plaintiff, the Defendants, and the Intervenor is unnecessary to be jointly determined. Therefore, the first instance court only determines whether the application for intervention by the intervenor who filed an appeal is legitimate.

2. Whether the application for intervention is lawful;

A. On June 16, 2016, the Intervenor’s summary of the Intervenor’s assertion entered into a sales contract to purchase the instant real estate from Defendant B, the owner of the instant real estate, and the Defendant B’s failure to perform his/her duty to transfer ownership, thereby seeking performance of the contract.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate from G on September 2003, and entrusted the registration of ownership transfer with the name of Chokman Defendant B. Defendant B filed the instant lawsuit seeking the registration of ownership transfer due to the invalidation of a title trust agreement with G’s heir, Defendant C, D, and E due to sale with G.

However, Defendant B did not perform the Intervenor’s claim for transfer registration of ownership but did not dispute the Plaintiff’s claim of this case at all, and thus, the judgment of the court of first instance which accepted the claim was rendered. This behavior by Defendant B is intended to infringe the Intervenor’s rights or legal status in collusion with the Plaintiff.

Therefore, in the event that the plaintiff won the lawsuit in this case, there is a concern that the intervenor's right, that is, the right to claim for ownership transfer registration, may be infringed, and the intervenor shall prevent such infringement.