1. The plaintiff's appeal on the part of the claim for monetary payment against the defendants shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's defendants.

1. Determination on whether the appeal on the part of a claim for payment of money is lawful

A. Although the Plaintiff provided the Plaintiff with the instant vehicle as security, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants suffered damages from the limitation on the use, operation, provision of security, etc. of the said vehicle on the wind that was reported as illegal name, without accepting the transfer of ownership registration, and on the wind that the Plaintiff filed a report with the Plaintiff, and stated in the purport of the claim that the Defendants would seek compensation for damages from KRW 5,00,000 and damages for delay thereof (hereinafter “instant monetary payment claim”). However, the first instance court did not state the above monetary payment claim in the column for the purport of the first instance judgment, and it is obvious that the judgment on the said monetary payment was not written in the reasoning of the judgment.

B. Therefore, notwithstanding the order of the first instance court that all of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed, the first instance court omitted the judgment on the monetary payment claim of this case, and the above case concerning monetary payment is still pending in the first instance court.

Nevertheless, the Plaintiff’s appeal that included this part in the purport of appeal is unlawful as it constitutes filing an appeal against the part not subject to appeal.

2. Determination on the claim for the implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion E and F, around January 18, 2015, delegated the Plaintiff with the authority to provide the instant automobile as collateral by the Defendants, a co-owner of the instant automobile, to provide the said automobile as collateral for transfer, and the Plaintiff lent KRW 5.7 million to E on January 18, 2015.

However, because E and F completely have documents necessary for the transfer registration of ownership, the Plaintiff is unable to register the transfer of ownership on the instant motor vehicle.

On the other hand, E and F shall provide the instant automobile as security for transfer and make it impossible to repay the loan.