On December 31, 2013, the Defendant Company merged with C and the Defendant Company merged with D (hereinafter referred to as “D”) on the same day, and the Plaintiff was dismissed from office of the Defendant Company, a surviving company after the merger, on August 7, 2014 while being employed as D around July 201.

B. On November 29, 201, a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) was newly registered under D prior to the merger.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff actually purchased the instant automobile in the name of D prior to the merger, but agreed to transfer the registration title to the Plaintiff at any time upon the Plaintiff’s request, and sought implementation of the transfer of ownership registration procedure on the instant automobile due to the termination of title trust on the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, the Defendant asserted that, while denying the above title trust agreement, the instant automobile was owned by D purchased by D prior to the merger, and that the Plaintiff’s claim is groundless.

B. Determination 1) According to the evidence Nos. 2 and 2, the defendant company entered the instant automobile as D’s fixed assets in the specifications of D’s fixed assets at the time of the merger into D’s merger. However, the following circumstances are acknowledged: Gap’s entries, including numbers, and Eul’s testimony, and Gap’s entire purport of pleading. ① The merger between the defendant company and D is merely a merger with the purpose of causing the collapse effect of D’s manufacturing technology and B’s distribution know-how prior to the merger, not a monetary consideration following the merger, and the above fixed asset specifications are also formally in the merger process.