1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

The Plaintiff is seeking confirmation that there is no ownership of the building indicated in the attached Form “the indication of the real estate” (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant.

However, in a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be the benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is in dispute between the parties regarding the legal relationship subject to it, and thereby, it is recognized that the receiving of a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate such apprehension or risk when there is apprehension or risk in the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da218511, Dec. 11, 2014). In a case where there is no benefit of confirmation, the lawsuit is unlawful

As to the instant case, it is recognized that the public health unit and the Defendant also did not own ownership of the instant building in a state of not being registered. The instant lawsuit seeking confirmation on the premise that there is a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as to the existence of ownership of the instant building cannot be recognized.

Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed.