1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with Gap evidence No. 1, No. 3, and No. 6-1, and No. 2. The whole purport of the pleadings shall be considered. A.

Btel management body is a management body composed of all sectional owners of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Btel pursuant to the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the "Aggregate Buildings Act"), and the plaintiff is a sectional owner of the above officetel 520.

B. On May 31, 2014, the management body held a general meeting of the management body and passed a resolution to appoint E as the manager, and D as the auditor (hereinafter “instant resolution”).

C. On May 31, 2015, the Defendant, the chairman of the election commission of the above management body, announced that E was a custodian and D was elected as an auditor (hereinafter “instant announcement”).

2. The Plaintiff’s legitimacy of the instant lawsuit is based on the evidence of false manipulation, and the Defendant is not the chairman of the election management committee appointed by the resolution of the general meeting of the above management committee, and thus, the instant public notice is not entitled to be made, and thus, sought confirmation of its invalidity against the Defendant.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because there is no benefit of confirmation.

However, in a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of a right. The benefit of confirmation is recognized only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment against the defendant to eliminate the risks of the plaintiff's rights or legal status, and thus, the defendant of the lawsuit for confirmation must be a person who is likely to cause apprehensions in the plaintiff's legal status by dispute over the plaintiff's rights or legal relations, and there is a benefit of confirmation against such defendant.

Supreme Court Decision 200