1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Article 250 of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “A lawsuit for confirmation may also be instituted in order to determine whether or not the document verifying legal relations is authentic.” Thus, a document which is the object of a lawsuit to confirm whether or not the document is authentic is limited to a document directly proving legal relations, and “a document certifying legal relations” means a document which directly proves the existence or absence of a specific legal relationship from the content of the document.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the authenticity of a document, and thereby exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. In so doing, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench, except as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da29290 Decided June 14, 2007, etc.). Attached Form “Contents Certification (Peremptory Notice)” (hereinafter “instant document”) merely requires the Plaintiff to explain certain matters and does not directly prove the existence or absence of a certain legal relationship from the content of the document. Thus, it cannot be the subject of a lawsuit to confirm the authenticity of the instant document. Moreover, even if the authenticity of the instant document is confirmed, it cannot be deemed that the dispute itself with respect to the legal relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant or that is significantly helpful for the settlement of the dispute itself. Thus, there is no benefit to seek confirmation of the authenticity of the instant document.

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it as per Disposition.