2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On July 2, 2010, the Plaintiff purchased a motor vehicle indicated in the annexed register of the vehicle (the original motor vehicle number was “F” but the number of the motor vehicle was changed to “G” on November 27, 2013, upon receipt of the registration of transfer of name on November 27, 2013, and completed the procedure for new registration of the ownership of the motor vehicle in the name of the Plaintiff on the same day.

B. On May 7, 2012, E, although there is no intention or ability to return the instant automobile to the Plaintiff, by deceiving the Plaintiff to be subject to the call where the said automobile was defective, received the said automobile from the Plaintiff’s spouse, and sold it at will to the Defendant who engages in the middle class trading business on the same day, and the Defendant completed the transfer registration procedure with respect to the said automobile upon the receipt of the same day.

C. On May 8, 2012, the following day, the Defendant sold the instant automobile to B, and B completed the transfer registration procedure as to the said automobile I received on the same day.

After that, B sold the instant automobile to C on November 27, 2013, and C, upon receipt of the same day, has completed the transfer registration procedure for the said automobile and operated it.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 13 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it conflicts with the res judicata effect of the said final and conclusive judgment, on the grounds that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant with the Daegu District Court 2012Kadan25637, which was the same as the instant case.

However, according to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 14, 15, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and the whole pleadings, the plaintiff is liable for property damage caused by tort against the defendant at the date of pleading in the Daegu District Court case No. 2012Gadan25637, Sept. 4, 2014.