1. All plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The plaintiff A is a member of the D Regional Housing Association (the former name: the F Regional Housing Association; hereinafter referred to as the "instant Housing Association") established to build the land housing of the Seongdong-gu Seoul and 36 parcels of land outside Seongdong-gu, Seoul, and the plaintiff B is the head of the said Housing Association.

2. ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit, we examine whether the Plaintiffs are legitimate to challenge the Defendant’s instant housing association director and the absence of membership.

In a lawsuit for confirmation of rights, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights. The benefit of confirmation is recognized in cases where there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and thereby, when there is apprehension or danger in the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status, obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate such apprehension or risk (see Supreme Court Decisions 2014Da218511, Dec. 11, 2014; 2017Da216271, Jul. 11, 2017). In addition, in a lawsuit for confirmation of the status of a non-corporate association’s representative or partner, in cases where a lawsuit is filed against the relevant representative or partner, the judgment citing such claim is rendered.

Even if the judgment cannot be effective to the relevant organization, it cannot be the most effective and appropriate way to resolve the dispute between the parties surrounding the status of the representative or members. Thus, the claim against the representative or members without the organization is unlawful because there is no benefit of confirmation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da12905 Decided July 12, 1991, Supreme Court Decision 2010Da30676, 30683 Decided October 28, 2010, Supreme Court Decision 2011Da10155 Decided February 16, 2015, etc.). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the Defendant, who is not the instant housing association, seeks confirmation of the absence of the status as a director and a member of the instant housing association against the said non-existence.