자동차소유권이전등록절차이행
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant shall receive KRW 2,766,722 from the plaintiff at the same time.
1. The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is as follows. The "2.9" in Part 2, Part 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be ". 6, 2015," and the "Evidence 3, 5, 6, 5, and 6" in Part 5, Part 14 shall be "A, 3, 5, 6, 5, and 6, according to the overall purport of the entries and arguments in subparagraphs A through 6," respectively. Part 5, 6 through 11 shall be as follows. Part 6, 13 through 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be as stated in the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the cases being used after each of the following paragraph 3, and it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. In light of the above legal principles and legal provisions as seen earlier, the part 3, which was used for the first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s second instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s judgment, and the instant contract’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance court’s second instance judgment to the Defendant, the Plaintiff’s second instance court’s second instance court’s order to terminate the instant contract, and thus, the instant contract was lawfully terminated on February 6, 2015.
Therefore, the Defendant, barring special circumstances, on February 6, 2015, on the instant motor vehicle, was based on the termination of the instant contract.