2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the entrusted management contract of the instant vehicle is deemed to have been lawfully terminated on May 27, 2016, on which the copy of the complaint of this case containing the intent of termination of the Plaintiff. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obliged to implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership for the instant vehicle on May 27, 2016 to the Plaintiff on the ground of the termination of the entrusted management contract.

B. As to the defendant's argument, since the defendant did not receive a total of KRW 1,330,254 including management expenses, etc. under the above consignment management contract in this case, it is alleged that the defendant sought simultaneous performance with the execution of the above consignment management procedure. Thus, there is no dispute between the parties, and the fact that the plaintiff did not pay the defendant a total of KRW 1,330,254,000,000,000 to the defendant, and it is reasonable to regard that the obligation to pay the transfer of ownership registration procedure and the obligation to pay the delinquent management expenses, etc. for the land of a party to the land following the termination of the above consignment management contract in this case is in simultaneous performance relationship in light of the principle of equity. Therefore, the defendant is liable to implement the transfer registration procedure for ownership transfer on the motor vehicle stated in the attached list to the plaintiff on May 27, 2016.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is justified.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.