2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The real estate of this case is "the real estate of this case" between Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D branch office No. 201 et al.

"A" of the former lease contract of February 6, 2010, which is referred to as "A" of the former lease contract of February 6, 2010.

In light of the above, the defendant, a licensed real estate agent, forged it, and submitted it to F as evidentiary materials in the lawsuit claiming the return of the lease deposit against the deceased, thereby causing danger to the plaintiff's legal status. Thus, the plaintiff's legal status is claimed to seek confirmation of the truth of the above lease contract.

According to the statement of evidence No. 1, the whole lease contract of this case is acknowledged as being the name of the plaintiff and the deceased, and therefore, the profits on the truth-finding of the whole lease contract of this case shall be deemed as the title holder, the plaintiff and the deceased's heir, who is the title holder. Thus, seeking confirmation of invalidity of the whole lease contract of this case against the defendant who is merely a licensed real estate agent acting as a broker of the real estate of this case cannot be deemed as an effective and appropriate method to remove any danger existing in the plaintiff's rights or legal status.

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation, it is so decided as per Disposition.