1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The litigation costs shall be borne by the attorney of the plaintiff.

1. The existence of the attorney's power of attorney of this case shall be subject to ex officio investigation by the court. If the power of attorney of this case is a private document, the court shall decide whether to issue a certification order with respect to the certification of the power of attorney of this case belongs to the discretion of the court. However, if the other party is disputed and there is no obvious evidence to prove that the power of attorney is authentic on the record, the court shall investigate whether the power of attorney is defective, such as issuing a certification order with respect to the certification of the power of attorney, or examining whether the power of attorney is properly delegated.

(2) On October 29, 2009, the plaintiffs' legal representative did not comply with the order of certification, and the plaintiffs' legal representative expressed his/her intention to submit materials to the plaintiff's legal representative for the first time of pleading. (See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da37247, Oct. 29, 2009). In this case, the defendant argued that the plaintiffs' legal representative delegated the plaintiffs' legal representative of the lawsuit of this case in response and preparatory documents, and that the plaintiffs' legal representative did not assert any assertion as to the existence of his/her power of representation. (2) The court stated that the plaintiff's legal representative did not submit materials to this part of the first time of pleading and stated that the court did not comply with the order of certification. (3) Although the plaintiffs' name was written in the letter of delegation of the lawsuit of this case, its substantial nature is unclear, for example, the plaintiff's legal representative has no address or address to the plaintiff's legal representative. (3) It appears that the plaintiff's address was omitted or unclear.