1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the claim for payment of fines for negligence and taxes and public imposts shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

1. We examine the legitimacy of this part of the lawsuit in this case, ex officio, as to the lawfulness of the part concerning the claim for payment of fines for negligence and the payment of taxes and public charges.

Even if the original and the Defendant determined who is liable to pay the fine for negligence and the taxes and the public charges, the effect of this judgment does not naturally extend to a taxation institution that is not a party to the instant lawsuit.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s duty to pay the fine for negligence and the tax imposed on the Plaintiff in relation to the administrative agency’s relationship is not extinguished through the instant lawsuit or transferred to the Defendant.

Therefore, the part of the lawsuit of this case, which claims the payment of fines and taxes, is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

2. Although the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant with the same content as this case as Suwon District Court 2015Kadan20052, the Plaintiff was sentenced to dismissal judgment due to lack of evidence, and the judgment became final and conclusive.

However, since the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the latter court cannot make a judgment inconsistent with the previous final and conclusive judgment, the Plaintiff’s claim for this part of the claim is not permissible as it claims inconsistent with the legal relationship judged in the judgment in the previous suit in which res judicata has already occurred.

[However, the res judicata is interrupted in cases where a new ground arises after the closing of argument in the previous suit. Here, “new ground arising after the closing of argument” refers to a new fact, and does not include circumstances such as the existence of a new evidence of the existing fact (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da222149, Aug. 30, 2016). Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for acquisition of the ownership transfer registration procedure against the Defendant cannot be accepted without further review.

3. Conclusion, the part of the instant lawsuit’s claim for payment of fines and taxes is unlawful.