1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim (including the part added in the trial) is dismissed.

3...

1. The husband C of the Plaintiff’s assertion borrowed KRW 5 million from the Defendant around 2009, and the Defendant was unable to pay the above money, and the Defendant brought the instant automobile owned by the Plaintiff to transfer its ownership registration.

However, the Defendant did not transfer the ownership registration of the instant motor vehicle and operated it illegally and paid the Plaintiff KRW 4,046,60 out of the money due to the failure to pay the fine for negligence in total of KRW 11,089,540, including the fine for negligence for violation of parking and stopping and the fine for negligence for violation of speed, etc., and is urged to pay the remainder of KRW 7,042,940.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for acquiring the ownership transfer registration for the instant automobile from the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 11,089,540.

2. We examine the judgment. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone that the Defendant transferred the ownership of the instant motor vehicle from the Plaintiff.

It is difficult to recognize that the instant vehicle did not pay an administrative fine imposed on the violation of parking or stopping regulations while operating the instant vehicle, etc., and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings with D’s testimony, D’s operation of the instant motor vehicle from around 2009 can only be recognized.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit without further review.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance which has different conclusions is unfair, and all of the plaintiff's claim including the additional claim in the trial is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.