1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Plaintiff’s assertion

On June 30, 2003, the Plaintiff started the business with the name of the Defendant and “C” and completed the ownership registration in the future of the Plaintiff by purchasing the instant vehicle at the Defendant’s request. On June 30, 2003, the Plaintiff transferred the instant vehicle to the Defendant and completed the ownership transfer registration in the future of the Defendant.

However, since the Defendant operates the instant automobile without completing the ownership transfer registration in its own future and imposes an administrative fine and automobile tax on the Plaintiff’s future, the Defendant is obligated to accept from the Plaintiff the transfer registration procedure due to the transfer on June 30, 2003 and pay the administrative fine, automobile tax, etc. imposed on the instant automobile from June 30, 2003 to the Plaintiff.

However, the statement of No. 1-1, 2, and 3 alone, the Defendant decided to acquire the instant motor vehicle from the Plaintiff.

It is insufficient to recognize that the instant motor vehicle was operated after delivery, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the fact-finding results with respect to the legislative market of this court and the chief of the police station, it is acknowledged that people other than the defendant concluded an insurance contract with respect to the instant automobile after June 30, 2003, and that the Defendant was not present as the offender of the administrative fine imposed on the instant automobile. In light of this, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant was not operating the instant automobile.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.