1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate (ex officio determination), the Construction Machinery Management Act provides that "the owner or possessor shall report to the Mayor/Do Governor on any change in registered matters of construction machinery (Article 5 (1)), as prescribed by Presidential Decree (hereinafter referred to as "construction machinery sales business operator") and that "where a person who has registered construction machinery sales business under Article 21 (1) (hereinafter referred to as "construction machinery sales business operator") buys or sells construction machinery or arranges the sale of construction machinery, he/she shall report on the change in registered matters under paragraph (1) in lieu of the buyer concerned: Provided, That this shall not apply where the buyer directly reports on the change (Article 5 (2)), and "where a person who purchased construction machinery without obtaining construction machinery sales business operator's permission fails to report on the change in registered matters under paragraph (1), he/she may report on the change (referring to the owner recorded in the construction machinery register at the time of reporting on the change)

In this case, the Plaintiff sought acquisition of the registration procedure on the ground that the Defendant purchased the construction machinery listed in the [Attachment List in the Plaintiff’s name (hereinafter “instant construction machinery”) from the Plaintiff and received it, but did not accept the registration of change of ownership. However, in addition to the purport of the entire pleadings in the entry in evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff is not the Plaintiff but the owner recorded in the construction machinery register of this case, and the Defendant can recognize that the Plaintiff purchased the construction machinery of this case from B, not the Plaintiff, and there is no ground to deem that the Plaintiff may directly seek the registration of change of ownership, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it was filed by a non-party-qualified person.

2. The instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.