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

The plaintiff is a corporation established for the purpose of general trucking transport business, and is the business permission authority for each truck (A Truck, B Truck, and C Truck) listed in the attached Form.

D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) created illegally the number plate of a general cargo vehicle and sold it. On March 6, 2009, the fact that around March 6, 2009, even though there was no purchase of the water number plate of a special purpose tank, prepared a false sales contract as if he purchased two motor vehicles (E vehicle number F) of a special purpose tank (E vehicle number F) and G vehicle (G vehicle number H). From a public official in charge of public offering the above illegal truck increase, the number of a special purpose truck increased by 104 for E vehicles and the number of a special purpose truck increased by 72 vehicles for G vehicles, the total number of a 176 truck number plate for each special purpose truck increased by using the notice of permission change (vehicle scrapping) to 176 of the number plate of a general truck.

The plaintiff acquired three (I, J, and K) of the number plates of general cargo vehicles illegally produced from D, and reported the transfer or acquisition of freight trucking services to the defendant, and the defendant accepted each report of transfer or acquisition of freight trucking services on August 21, 2009 (I), September 9, 2009 (J), and September 22, 2009 (K) respectively.

(2) On July 13, 2015, the Defendant: (a) had three trucks registered with the Plaintiff on July 13, 2015; (b) had D with a special purpose-type truck (the tank locks) and changed with a general truck; and (c) had registered with the Plaintiff on July 13, 2015 with a special purpose-type truck (the tank locks); and (d) had the aforementioned illegal increase of the number of trucks registered with a general truck (the foregoing illegal increase of the number of trucks was amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013; hereinafter “former

Article 3 (3) is an act in violation of paragraph (3) of the same Article, and the plaintiff acquires the same truck by transfer.