1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Determination on this safety defense

A. On July 22, 2015, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the fact that the deceased was in de facto marital relationship with the Plaintiff as to the Defendant on the ground that he/she was his/her sole heir of the deceased B.

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

B. A lawsuit for confirmation is permissible when the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is infeasible danger, and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da25078, Jun. 28, 2002). Therefore, even though a lawsuit for performance with respect to a specific legal relationship may be brought immediately, seeking confirmation of the legal relationship premised on it does not have the benefit of confirmation in principle.

As to the instant case, the Plaintiff appears to have filed the instant lawsuit in order to dispose of the deceased’s property.

Thus, rather than demanding confirmation on the comprehensive status relationship of a sole heir, the plaintiff's filing of a performance lawsuit on the legal relationship of specific inherited property can be a way to solve the dispute fundamentally.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is not related to the legal relations as to the inherited property on which the dispute exists, but rather seeking confirmation of the legal relations as to the status of the inheritor, which is the premise thereof. Thus, since it cannot be deemed a valid and appropriate means for resolving the dispute, there is no benefit of legal confirmation.

(In addition, even based on the plaintiff's assertion itself, the plaintiff is only a de facto spouse of the deceased, and thus does not become a legal heir due to the death of the deceased. Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.