(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.10 2017가합513748

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.10 2017가합513748

종원지위 확인 등 청구

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a clan that jointly sets up DC trial F, and the plaintiff is a member of the defendant's clan.

B. The Defendant issued the Grand Cross on 2010, and issued it, did not enter it in the Grand Cross on the ground that the 24-year-old Nonparty E and the Dams comprised of his descendants, which were recorded in the previous Grand Cross, could not be recognized as its existence, and instead, entered the subsequent descendants in the Grand Cross. Some of the Cmphs, including the Plaintiff, did not refuse to enter them in the Grand Cross and did not enter them in the Grand Cross.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 6 and 7 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. A clan consisting of descendants of the plaintiff's assertion E is a clan belonging to the defendant's clan, and the plaintiff is a member of the clan.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not enter the dissolution in Category D D's clan, and as a result, C's dissolution such as the plaintiff was not recognized as a member of the clan of the defendant's clan, and it was criticized that it is a clan that has no relationship with blood was a member of the clan of the defendant's clan.

Therefore, the plaintiff seeks confirmation of the purport of the claim to the defendant.

3. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, there shall be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation shall be recognized only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment against the defendant in order to eliminate apprehensions, risks, and risks that exist in the plaintiff's rights or legal status (see Supreme Court Decision 91Da14420, Dec. 10, 1991). Thus, if the subject of confirmation is not related to the right or legal status of the plaintiff, but is related to mere factual relations or is not related to the plaintiff's right or legal status, or there is no apprehension between the plaintiff and the defendant, it shall not be deemed that there

The lawsuit of this case.

참조판례

-(변경)대법원 1991. 12. 10. 선고 91다14420 판결

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2016.02.17 2015가합2908

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.10 2016가단66286

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.10.16 2017가합407752

-부산지방법원 2017.08.09 2016가합3853

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.07 2019가단5070816