1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Construction machinery listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant construction machinery”) was owned by Defendant C for business purposes, and the auction procedure of construction machinery was commenced on June 27, 2016.

B. On November 2, 2016, Defendant C changed the use of the instant construction machinery to its own use, and on this basis, Defendant C registered D, a different dump truck, for business use.

(The new registration for business is restricted in accordance with the adjustment of supply and demand policy that limits the new registration for construction machinery business, and only registration shall be allowed in the case of changing the use of existing construction machinery for its own use or cancelling the registration thereof).

On November 4, 2016, 2016, the construction machinery of this case changed for private use, which was changed for Defendant C, became the ownership transfer registration in the future of Defendant C, and again became the ownership transfer registration in the future of Defendant C.

On November 24, 2016, the Plaintiff was awarded the instant construction machinery bid during the said voluntary auction procedure.

E. The Seo-gu Incheon Western Office responded to the Plaintiff’s application for the registration of transfer of ownership for the business use of the Plaintiff’s business for the foregoing reasons and that it can only be registered

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, fact-finding to the Incheon Seo-gu Office, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment asserted that since the construction machinery of this case acquired ownership after being awarded a successful bid in a voluntary auction procedure with knowledge that it is business use, it should be registered as transfer of ownership for business use. However, there is no evidence that the plaintiff has been awarded such business right.

Rather, even based on the appraisal report (No. 1) prepared in the above voluntary auction procedure, it is recognized that only the value of the instant construction machinery itself is appraised and became the object of auction.

3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit for further review. It is so decided as per Disposition.