2019 Ghana 6052 Action for the Confirmation of the Fact of Certificate

○ Kim

Kim △△△

Law Firm ○○, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

October 22, 2019

November 19, 2019

1. The lawsuit of this case is dismissed.

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

On November 19, 2013, between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the document duly formed by the self-real estate lease agreement refers to the document duly formed.

Defarcing that material.

1. A lawsuit for confirmation may be instituted in order to determine whether or not the document verifying legal relations is authentic (Article 250 of the Civil Procedure Act). The lawsuit for confirmation of authenticity of such a deed may be instituted in order to determine whether or not the document was forged or altered, unless it was written by the person who prepared the document.

As such, an independent lawsuit is allowed with respect to the confirmation of the fact that a document is a truth-finding in writing, and the authenticity of the document becomes final and conclusive by a judgment, that there is a possibility that the dispute itself may be resolved or at least contribute to the settlement of the dispute, as a result of the parties’ failure to dispute the truth-finding of the document. Therefore, even if the truth-finding of the document seeking confirmation is final and conclusive by a lawsuit, it is not possible to eliminate the uncertainty of the legal relationship or legal status to be proved in writing, and there is no benefit in confirmation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da15317, Dec. 10, 191).

2. The plaintiff asserts that Gap evidence No. 1 (Real Estate Lease Contract) was proved to have a benefit to seek confirmation from the deed's truth because the defendant and the deceased provided forged land and buildings owned by Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu 26 and the deceased. However, there is no evidence to prove that there is a possibility of dispute resolution or at least a significant contribution to dispute resolution due to the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant are likely to settle a dispute due to the truth confirmation of evidence No. 1 (Real Estate Lease Contract) and the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant are highly likely to contribute to dispute resolution.

It is difficult to recognize the benefit of obtaining confirmation of the truth of the evidence No. 1 (Real Estate Lease Contract).

3. The instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-he