1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of a lawsuit shall be borne individually by each party.

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is recognized in cases where there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and where the judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate such apprehension or risk, if there is apprehension that the plaintiff's rights or legal status

According to the records, the fact that E, a corporation, completed the registration of ownership of D vehicles on March 26, 2014, can be recognized.

Therefore, even if the plaintiff and the defendant are judged as to the existence of the obligation described in the purport of the claim, such judgment does not have any effect on E, which is the owner of the D vehicle, and thus, the lawsuit in this case cannot be deemed as the most effective and appropriate means to remove legal instability and risks surrounding D vehicles.

(A) The plaintiff filed an application for the correction of a party’s indication to correct the defendant’s indication from “A” to “E” on April 28, 2014, but the correction of a party indication is permitted only to the extent that the party’s identity is recognized as a matter of principle. Thus, it is unlawful to correct the party indication as a corporation with representative director in a lawsuit filed against an individual. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation, and thus, it shall be dismissed. The judgment of the court of first instance is unfair on the ground that it is so unfair, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.