207 Doz. 4737 Confirmation of the existence of the accessories

P (45 years old, South)

Law Firm Doz.

[Defendant-Appellee]

D

November 13, 2008

December 11, 2008

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

The defendant (appointed party, hereinafter referred to as the defendant) and the designated parties confirm that they are not all members of AACF (AAP).

1. The plaintiff's ground for claim

원고는, 자신은 AA씨대군파(소종중 bb정파)의 종원인 자인데, 피고 및 선정자들은 A A씨 대군파의 종원이 아님에도 불구하고, 1983년 발간된 에 허위의 자료를 근거로 입보(入譜)하여 AA씨대군파(소종중 aa 정파)의 종원으로 잘못 등재되었다고 주장하면서, 피고 및 선정자들을 상대로 위 사람들이 AA씨대군파(소종중 aa정파)의 종원이 아니라는 확인을 구한다.

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense of safety

As to this, the defendant does not object to BB (AC) which is a clan, but to the purport that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case filed against the defendant and the designated parties who are the cause of the clan, is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

The lawsuit for confirmation is not necessarily limited to the legal relationship between the parties, but can be the legal relationship between the parties or between third parties. However, for the benefit of confirmation of the legal relationship, it is necessary to immediately determine the legal relationship in accordance with the legal relationship, which is the object of confirmation, in order to eliminate the risk and non-existence, and it is necessary to immediately determine the legal relationship by the confirmation judgment that is the object of confirmation, and it should be the most effective and appropriate means. The other party asserts the rights or legal relations against the third party that are inconsistent with the claimant's assertion and seeks confirmation of the third party's assertion that there is no rights or legal relations with the third party. Even if the lawsuit for confirmation is rendered in the lawsuit for confirmation, the other party's rights to the third party are not determined and its legal effect does not affect the third party's rights, and thus, the lawsuit for confirmation of non-existence and non-existence of rights to the third party cannot be an effective and adequate means to resolve the existing danger and danger in his or her own rights or legal status (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da2678.).

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case against the defendant and the designated parties is unlawful because there is no benefit of confirmation, so it is decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, senior judge and senior judge;

Judges Bo Jae-cheon

Judges Lao Young-young