A. On July 2, 2010, the Plaintiff purchased the motor vehicle in the annexed 1 register of motor vehicle (the initial motor vehicle number was “F” but Defendant C was changed to “G” on November 27, 2013, upon receipt of the registration of transfer of name on November 27, 2013; hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”), and completed the procedure for new registration in the name of the Plaintiff on the same day.

B. On May 7, 2012, E had no intention or ability to return the instant motor vehicle to the Plaintiff, by deceiving the Plaintiff that the instant motor vehicle was a defect subject to recall, thereby accepting the instant motor vehicle from the Plaintiff’s spouse.

C. On May 7, 2012, E sold the said vehicle at will to the Defendant Company’s mother car dealer (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) who runs the used car sales business on May 7, 2012, and the Defendant Company completed the transfer registration procedure for the instant vehicle in the future of the Defendant Company as the day receiptH.

On May 8, 2012, the following day, the Defendant Company sold the instant automobile to Defendant B, and Defendant B completed the transfer registration procedure for the instant automobile in its name on the same day.

E. On November 27, 2013, Defendant B sold the instant motor vehicle to Defendant C, and Defendant C completed the transfer registration procedure for the instant motor vehicle in its name by the J of receipt on the same day.

F. Defendant C occupied and operated the instant motor vehicle from around the first day of pleading to April 14, 2015, and it is confirmed that Defendant C occupied and operated the instant motor vehicle even at the time of the closing of argument in the instant case.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 13 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The above Defendants’ claim against Defendant Company and Defendant C regarding the defense prior to the merits of the instant lawsuit are the same.