1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. The plaintiff and the selected party C are the defendant's parents (hereinafter "the plaintiff and the selected party C"), and even though they received economic support from the plaintiffs during their growth, they do not bear any obligation to support the plaintiffs, they voluntarily withdraw the pension insurance money that the plaintiffs subscribed to the defendant's name for old age, and they receive the litigation cost claim against the defendant, such as seizure and collection order from the plaintiffs' account in order to receive the lawsuit claim against the defendant for the return of the above pension insurance money, etc., the plaintiffs suffered suffering from the plaintiffs, such as various lawsuits and criminal complaints.

Therefore, maintaining the parent-child relationship between the plaintiffs and the defendant is merely causing pain to the plaintiffs. Thus, the relationship between the defendant and the parent-child is retroactively cut back at the time of birth of the defendant. The plaintiffs seek to prohibit the defendant from claiming any right or obligation as the plaintiffs even after the death of the plaintiffs.

2. As to the legitimacy of the lawsuit in this case by the final and conclusive judgment and ex officio of res judicata, the res judicata effect of the judgment of retirement depends on the defects in the requirements for the lawsuit established in the judgment, and thus, the lawsuit instituted again without supplementation of the requirements for the lawsuit in this case is unlawful as it conflicts with the res judicata effect of the judgment of retirement which became final and conclusive

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da70181 Decided April 8, 2003). The Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit identical to the purport of the instant claim on the ground that the relationship with the Defendant, which is a child against the Defendant, has already ceased to exist due to the failure of the court’s 2015Gahap73340, and that maintaining the relationship between the Defendant and the parent was only causing pain to the Plaintiffs. The said court filed a lawsuit on the basis of the right of personality and the right of privacy guaranteed by the Constitution, etc., and the said court on the ground that it only causes pain