1. To dismiss the instant lawsuit that has been changed in exchange at the trial;

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

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing the judgment of the court of first instance under the main sentence of Article 420

2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not, with respect to the determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Inasmuch as the subject of confirmation in a lawsuit for confirmation requires that it be the current rights or legal relations, barring any special circumstance, verification of the past rights or legal relations is not recognized, barring any special circumstance. If a lawsuit for confirmation of non-existence of the secured obligation of the right to collateral security is cancelled, then there is no benefit in confirmation as it concerns the past rights or legal relations (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da17585, Aug. 23, 2013). Meanwhile, a lawsuit for confirmation is not necessarily limited to legal relations between the parties to the lawsuit, but may be subject to legal relations between either the party to the lawsuit and a third party or between the third party. However, such legal relations need to be immediately determined by a confirmation judgment for the removal of the risks or non-existence of the litigant’s rights or legal status caused by such legal relations, and there is a benefit in confirmation that it should be the most effective and appropriate means.

(2) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant on July 20, 2018 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da34009, Nov. 22, 1996). According to the aforementioned evidence, the Plaintiff applied for a compulsory auction on the instant real estate and applied for a decision to commence compulsory auction on March 24, 2016, and the said real estate was sold on June 21, 2018 and the dividend was terminated on July 17, 2018, and the instant collateral security was revoked by compulsory auction on June 21, 2018, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant on July 20, 2018 (Seoul District Court Decision 2018Da321237, Jun. 20, 2018). Therefore, the lawsuit for confirmation of the existence of the instant obligation is either the past right or the lawsuit for confirmation of the existence of the obligation.