The judgment below

The part against the defendant is reversed, and this part of the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and this part is relevant.

Judgment ex officio is made.

A lawsuit for confirmation is permissible when the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is infeasible and dangerous, and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da69407, Dec. 14, 2007). The Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the absence of a right of retention against the Defendant who asserted a right of retention in a voluntary auction procedure for the instant building. According to the records, according to the records, the Plaintiff’s withdrawal of the application for voluntary auction on June 25, 2015, which is after the judgment of the lower court was rendered, and the Plaintiff’s establishment registration of a right of retention was revoked for termination on June 26, 2015. Thus, the Plaintiff has no legal interest in seeking confirmation of the absence of a right of retention against the Defendant.

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the grounds of appeal, the part against the defendant among the judgment below is reversed. Since this case is sufficient for the court to directly render a judgment, this part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked and the lawsuit concerning this part shall be dismissed, and the total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by each party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.