1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. On January 2017, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was transferred from E the place of business of the instant place of business (hereinafter “instant place of business”) under the name of partial repayment of the Plaintiff’s claim for KRW 100 million against E, under the pretext of partial repayment of the Plaintiff’s claim for the judgment deposit amounting to KRW 100 million.

The Plaintiff solely operated the Plaintiff’s business after acquiring the instant workplace, but the lessee’s name of the lease agreement on the instant workplace was in the future of the Defendant. Business registration on the instant workplace was made in the name of the Defendant jointly with the Plaintiff for convenience as shown in the separate sheet.

The Plaintiff, while transferring the instant place of business to another person, requested the Defendant to change the name of business registration concerning the instant place of business solely by the Plaintiff, and rejected the Defendant’s request for non-founded money.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, a substantial sole proprietor of the instant workplace, seeks implementation of the procedure for change of name, such as the written claim, against the Defendant, which is only a joint proprietor in its name.

2. Determination ex officio as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. As to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio, the health class, lawsuit for performance, as a matter of principle, shall be acknowledged as benefit in the protection of rights, as the Plaintiff asserts the existence of the right to claim performance. However, even if a favorable judgment was rendered by the Plaintiff in the lawsuit seeking performance and the judgment became final and conclusive, the benefit in the lawsuit cannot be deemed to have been recognized even if there is no practical benefit, such as the Plaintiff

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da200552, Sept. 30, 2016). (B)

(1) A businessman shall be the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over the place of business within 20 days from the commencement date of his/her business as prescribed by Presidential Decree.