1. The part concerning the claim for the confirmation of obligation to pay fines for negligence, automobile tax, etc. among the lawsuit in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 11, 1999, the Plaintiff purchased an automobile listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant automobile”) from the Abandoned Automobile Co., Ltd. and registered it under its own name.

B. On June 200, the Plaintiff: (a) requested a deceased person on his name to sell the instant vehicle to a deceased person; and (b) delivered the instant vehicle along with all documents necessary for the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant vehicle.

C. On August 28, 200, with respect to the instant automobile, a mortgage in the amount of KRW 4,500,000 was established and registered as to the instant automobile, and the said mortgage was transferred to D on November 14, 2002.

From February 5, 2001 to September 30, 2004, the Defendant operated the instant automobile without purchasing automobile insurance.

E. From April 2, 2001, the instant automobile is subject to registration of seizure due to the unpaid payment of various administrative fines, automobile tax, etc. due to a violation of parking or stopping regulations, etc.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, each entry of Eul evidence No. 1, this court's Incheon market, each fact-finding results on the Director of Incheon Police Station, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. On February 5, 2001, the Plaintiff confirmed that the Defendant was liable to pay fines for negligence, automobile tax, automobile tax, etc. from February 5, 2001 to the Plaintiff, who is a registered titleholder, because the Plaintiff did not register the transfer of ownership after acquiring the instant vehicle after acquiring the instant vehicle.

Ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the part concerning the claim for confirmation among the lawsuits of this case.

The benefit of confirmation in a lawsuit for confirmation is recognized in cases where there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and the judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means when the plaintiff's legal status is unstable and dangerous. Supreme Court Decisions 93Da40089 delivered on November 22, 1994; 93Da40089 delivered on December 22, 2005.