1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

On April 14, 2008, the Plaintiff asserts that on April 14, 2008, the Plaintiff sold C (former registration number : D) benzs 420 automobile (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) to the Defendant in the price of KRW 12 million,00,000,000, and sought payment of the purchase price and the delay damages.

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that the person who purchased the instant vehicle from the plaintiff is not the defendant but the defendant's husband, and that E paid the above purchase price.

On April 14, 2008, the fact that the Plaintiff registered the transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant with respect to the instant vehicle is not a dispute between the parties.

Furthermore, we examine who the party to the sales contract for the instant vehicle is the defendant or E.

Where an actor who enters into a contract has done a juristic act in the name of another person, the intention of the actor and the other party to the contract shall be determined as the party to the contract in accordance with the consent of the actor and the other party. Where the intent of the actor and the other party are not in accord with each other, the other party shall be determined by taking into account all the specific circumstances before the conclusion of the contract, such as the nature, content, purpose, and conclusion of the contract, if a reasonable person is a party to the contract, either the actor and the nominal owner

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da32120 Decided September 5, 2003, etc.). In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence Nos. 2-1, 2-3, 3-2, and 3-3, and the overall purport of testimony and pleading of the first instance trial witness E, the Plaintiff appears to have sold the instant vehicle to E, but the Plaintiff was in accord with the intent to transfer only the registered name of the relevant vehicle to the Defendant, and thus, the party to the sales contract for the instant vehicle is deemed to be E.