1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. We examine ex officio whether the instant lawsuit is lawful, as to the interest in the confirmation of the instant lawsuit.

In a case where one’s own right or legal status is a threat or interfered with by being denied by or against another person, the other party shall be required to verify his/her own right or legal status against the other party. The other party who denies his/her own right or legal status claims the rights or legal relations against a third party that cannot be compatible with his/her own claim and seek confirmation of the existence of the other party’s right or legal relation against the third party, which is the absence of such rights or legal relationship against the other party. Even if a judgment is rendered in favor of the other party in the lawsuit of confirmation, the judgment does not confirm his/her own right to the other party, but does not affect the third party, and thus, the lawsuit of confirmation of non-existence cannot serve as a valid and adequate means to resolve risks existing in his/her own right

(See Supreme Court Decisions 95Da26131 delivered on October 12, 1995, 2003Da49092 delivered on March 12, 2004, etc.). In addition, even if the Plaintiff was rendered a favorable judgment in the lawsuit in this case, the judgment does not confirm the Plaintiff’s right in relation to the Defendants, but does not affect Nonparty D or a third party. Thus, seeking confirmation of the invalidity of the contract stated in the claim against the Defendants against Nonparty D cannot be deemed an effective and appropriate means in resolving the dispute, and thus, the lawsuit in this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

2. In conclusion, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.