1. Motor vehicle tax and penalty imposed from May 16, 2002 on the motor vehicle stated in the attached list of the instant lawsuit.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 16, 2002, the Plaintiff completed the ownership transfer registration with respect to the automobiles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant automobiles”), provided the instant automobiles as collateral and borrowed five million won to the person in unsound name. At the same time, if the Plaintiff is unable to repay the borrowed money by the agreed date, the Plaintiff agreed to transfer the instant automobiles, and issued the documents necessary for the ownership transfer registration to the person in unsound name.

B. The Defendant purchased the instant automobile from his name defective, and concluded an automobile insurance contract with Samsung Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. from April 11, 2004 to April 14, 2015.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant was notified of the payment of fines for negligence, etc. on several occasions by imposing fines for negligence on the instant motor vehicle, and the registration of seizure was completed several times on the instant motor vehicle due to the failure to pay the automobile tax.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim for confirmation of the obligation to pay automobile tax, penalty, and administrative fine among the instant lawsuit

A. The plaintiff is seeking confirmation that "the plaintiff is liable to pay the automobile tax imposed on the motor vehicle of this case from May 16, 2002, which was the day on which he/she decided to transfer the motor vehicle of this case, and the defendant is liable to pay the penalty and fine for negligence incurred while driving the motor vehicle of this case after the above day." As to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this part,

B. In a lawsuit for confirmation, there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and thereby, it is recognized that it is the most effective and appropriate means to determine the plaintiff's legal status as a confirmation judgment to eliminate the anxiety and risk when the plaintiff's legal status is unstable and dangerous. Thus, Supreme Court Decision 194 delivered on November 22, 1994.