2. Whether there is a benefit in action to seek a passive confirmation of the other party's right, if a dispute over the reversion of a specific object exists;

2. A person who has no right to a specific object shall not be deemed to have any legal interest in respect of the specific object, and even if the person has a right to the specific object, if there is a dispute over the ownership of the right to the specific object, it is necessary to request the other party to confirm that he/she has no right to the specific object, unless there is a special circumstance.

The Defendant-Counterclaim (Counterclaim) rejects the preliminary counterclaim that the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff added at the trial.

The costs of lawsuit after an appeal shall be borne by each person.

A. Main Claim: On the registry of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter the same shall apply) and one of the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter the same shall apply) on December 26, 1978, with respect to the share of 340/840 of the real estate recorded in the annexed sheet, the registration of change in the name of each buyer on April 23, 1969 and December 26, 1978; on April 23, 1969, Defendant 3 of the registration of change in the name of the buyer on April 23, 1969 as to the share of the same real estate among the same real estate, the registration of change in the name of the buyer on December 26, 1978; and on the share of 85/840 of the same real estate, Defendant 4 fulfilled the registration of change in the name of the buyer on December 26, 1978.

Litigation Costs are assessed against the Defendants.

B. Preliminary Claim: It is confirmed on February 4, 1967 that the registration of change in the purchaser's name made in the name of Nonparty 1 on the ledger of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay located in Seoul Special Metropolitan City on the portion of 680/840 of the attached real estate.

Litigation Costs are assessed against the Defendants.

2. Counterclaim;

A. Main counterclaim claim: The plaintiffs confirmed that the plaintiffs lost their status as co-property heir of the deceased non-party 2 as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet against the defendants.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the plaintiffs

B. Preliminary counterclaim claim: The judgment that the plaintiffs confirm that the plaintiff does not have the right to recover the inherited property as co-property heir of the deceased non-party 2 as co-property heir of the attached property as to the real property stated in the attached Form (in addition, in the trial,

The defendants, among the original judgment, revoke the main claim and the main claim, and the judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' claims against the main claim is sought, and the judgment, such as the purport of the main counterclaim, is sought against the counterclaim.

The plaintiffs are the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay due to the execution of the land readjustment project in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and registered in the name of the deceased non-party 2 on September 15, 1949 in the land ledger in recompense for development outlay kept in Seoul Special Metropolitan City on February 15, 1961, and they jointly inherit them by the plaintiffs and non-party 1 (the defendant in the first instance). On February 4, 1967, the non-party 1, on the ground that the non-party 3 (the defendant in the first instance court), on the above land ledger of the development recompense for development outlay for development outlay, registered the change in its name on the basis of the above name on the basis of the non-party 3 (the defendant in the first instance court), on April 23, 1969, on the basis of the registration of change in the name of non-party 1 and 2, on April 26, 1978, the registration of change in the name of the above non-party 4 was null and void.

However, according to the fact-finding conducted by the court below, each statement of Nos. 8 and 10 (each confirmation source) of Nos. 8 and 10 (each confirmation source) presumed to be true, and the sale ledger of land allotted in recompense of development outlay of the plaintiffs' assertion as to the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City is prepared and kept in accordance with Article 21 of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regulation on the Management and Disposal of Land Secured in the form of established rules based on Article 66 of the Land Readjustment and Rearrangement Projects Act, or the ledger of administrative purpose prepared and kept in order to promote the convenience of administrative affairs with respect to land allotted in recompense of development outlay of development outlay, or it is not a change or public announcement of the rights to real estate recorded in the ledger, even if it is registered contrary to the truth in the ledger, and it is sufficient to seek cancellation or change of the registration in the ledger, and it is not necessary to seek confirmation of the registration itself, because there is no legal interest in the plaintiff's conjunctive claim or its principal legal interest in both the plaintiff's claim itself.

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

The Defendants: (a) registered the change of Nonparty 1’s title to the real estate stated in the separate sheet in the ground of the claim in this case had been duly made since all other co-inheritors of the deceased Nonparty 2 had obtained renunciation of inheritance or consent at the time; and (b) the remainder of the registered change was duly made in the ground of the claim in this case. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs, the deceased Nonparty 2’s heir or his substitute heir, did not have any right to the above real estate; and (c) based on the Plaintiffs’ claim for recovery of inherited property, the right to inheritance of the above real estate was based on the Plaintiffs’ claim for recovery of inherited property. The Plaintiffs’ right to inheritance was asserted as having been absolutely and finally extinguished on February 15, 1972 after the lapse of the physical period from February 15, 1962 when Nonparty 2 died, and the Plaintiffs were found to have lost their status as co-inheritors’ co-inheritors’s co-inheritors’s co-inheritors’s co-inheritors’s co-inheritors’s co-inheritors’s status with respect to the above real estate.

However, as to the above counter-claim, a person who has no right to the specific object shall not be deemed to have any legal interest in examining the above counter-claim ex officio and considering that there is no other person's right (including his status) with respect to the specific object, and even if the other person has a right to the specific object, it is necessary to request active confirmation of the existence of a right with respect to the specific object, not to request confirmation from the other party unless there is a special group's circumstance, unless there is a dispute as to the ownership of the right to the specific object. Thus, the defendant 2, who has sold the right to the above real estate to the defendant 3 and 4, has no right to the above real estate at present, so it shall be deemed that there is no legal interest in the confirmation immediately after the purchase or sale of the claim (in case of only one, even if it is known that there is no legal interest in the claim, such fact alone cannot be said that there is no legal interest in the claim for confirmation as to the above real estate, and it is also unnecessary to determine that the remaining defendants have no right to claim for confirmation on the specific object or the heir's.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, both the plaintiffs' principal claim and the defendants' counterclaim (including each preliminary claim) are dismissed as they are unlawful since they have no legal interest in seeking confirmation. Thus, the original judgment (excluding a preliminary counterclaim being added to the original judgment) which forms the conclusion is just and the plaintiffs and the defendants' respective appeals (excluding the defendant's incidental appeal against the principal claim in addition to the appeal against the counterclaim, in the first instance court), but the defendants are the appellant who appealed against the counterclaim within the prescribed time limit for appeal. However, if the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim are declared as one decision and have appealed against one of them, the remainder is not determined, and the appellate court may request an appellate trial by expanding the purport of appeal against the case at issue at the time of the closing of argument at the appellate court at all times. Thus, all of the defendants' appeals against the principal lawsuit are dismissed as well as the judgment of the appellate court after the addition in each of the preliminary appeals are assessed against each of the defendants, and the costs of appeal are assessed against each of the parties after the addition in each of the preliminary appeal.

Judges Kim-sung (Presiding Judge)