1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. On September 2007, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff offered a person who was unaware of name as collateral a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) and borrowed money, and provided a certificate of personal seal impression, a certified copy of resident registration, and a copy of identification card in the name of the Plaintiff necessary for the sale of the instant motor vehicle to the effect that the said person would waive ownership of the instant motor vehicle if he/she fails to pay the said money.

After all, the Plaintiff was unable to repay the loan to a person who is not the beneficiary of his name.

Since the defendant takes over the automobile of this case through a person without the name of the plaintiff on September 3, 2007, the defendant is obligated to take over the procedure for the ownership transfer registration of the above automobile under the name of the plaintiff.

B. The namelightist who received a loan from the Plaintiff by the Defendant is PelD Co., Ltd., the Defendant’s husband, and the said company received the instant automobile as security for the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the loan to the said company, and it is necessary to operate the instant automobile while keeping the instant automobile in custody, thereby purchasing a personal automobile insurance policy in the name of the Defendant for convenience.

However, the Defendant did not acquire ownership of the instant automobile from the said company.

2. According to the result of the fact-finding inquiry by the court of this case, it can be acknowledged that the defendant entered into an insurance contract for the automobile of this case with Samsung Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. in his own name for a period from January 7, 2009 to January 7, 2010.

However, the above facts alone are insufficient to recognize the fact of transfer and takeover of the instant automobile as alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

3. The plaintiff's claim for the conclusion is dismissed as it is without merit.