1. Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim for confirmation of liability to pay taxes, public charges, and fines for negligence shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff.

1. The indication of the claim [the judgment by service by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)] is between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the defendant is between the couple, and the defendant decided that the ownership transfer registration name as to each of the automobiles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant automobiles”) is the plaintiff’s name due to the defendant’

However, the Plaintiff and the Defendant began to stay separately from October 2008, and around that time, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to take over the name of the instant automobile from the Defendant, and the Defendant did not comply with this request. From the early 2012, the Defendant did not comply with the request.

Therefore, the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case and the termination of the title trust agreement for the instant automobiles, so the Defendant is obligated to take over the ownership transfer registration for the instant automobiles from the Plaintiff.

2. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of rejection portion (the part concerning a claim for confirmation of liability for payment of a tax, public charges, and a fine for negligence), the benefit of confirmation must be the benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights. The benefit of confirmation is disputed between the parties as to the legal relationship subject thereto, and thus, it is recognized that the receiving of a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the anxiety or risk (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da9329, Feb. 25, 2010). Since separate procedures for objection against a fine for negligence or automobile tax are provided for in the procedure for objection, the plaintiff must dispute the legality of the disposition of imposition, such as a fine for negligence on the ground of the aforementioned reasons alleged in the procedure for objection. Even if the plaintiff is rendered a judgment of confirmation, the judgment is effective only between the plaintiff and the defendant, but it does not affect the administrative agency imposing a fine for negligence, etc., and thus, the part concerning