1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. Of the instant lawsuit, part of the claim for confirmation of liability for payment of administrative fines, automobile tax, etc.

1. Determination on claims for confirmation of liability for payment of administrative fines, automobile tax, etc.

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant, on January 31, 2009, did not register the transfer of ownership after the acquisition of the instant vehicle, and that the Plaintiff, a registered titleholder, imposed an administrative fine, automobile tax, etc. on the Plaintiff, and that the Defendant was liable to pay the said administrative fine, automobile tax, etc. to the Defendant

B. Determination ex officio is recognized in cases where: (a) the benefit of confirmation in a lawsuit for health care and confirmation conflicts between the parties regarding the legal relationship subject to the lawsuit; and (b) the determination by the confirmation judgment in order to eliminate the Plaintiff’s legal status uneasiness and risk is the most effective and appropriate means (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Da40089, Nov. 22, 1994; 2003Da55059, Dec. 22, 2005). In this case, even if the Plaintiff was rendered confirmation on the grounds as alleged in the Plaintiff’s assertion, the res judicata effect of the judgment does not extend only between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and it does not affect the State or the local government; and (c) the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay an administrative fine or automobile tax is extinguished.

Since it is not transferred to the defendant or to the defendant, the judgment of the above confirmation cannot be the most effective and appropriate means to remove the plaintiff's legal status's anxiety and risk.

Therefore, the part of the claim for confirmation of the obligation to pay fines, automobile tax, etc. in the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit

2. Determination on the claim for taking over the procedure for the registration of automobile ownership transfer

A. (i) On January 2009, the Plaintiff requested sale of the instant vehicle to the person under whose name the Plaintiff made a request, and delivered documents necessary for the registration of transfer of ownership.

The defendant, on January 31, 2009, shall be the case through a nameless box.