A. Basic Facts 1) Plaintiff A is the G rocketing earth and H knit vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “rocketing and knit vehicle”).

Plaintiff B was the owner, and Plaintiff B was the sea lamps(RAM)1500 vehicles(hereinafter “sea lamps”).

Defendant D was the owner, and Defendant D was the user of Defendant E who is a corporation for the purpose of the used vehicle brokerage business, etc., and Defendant E was the employee of Defendant D (motor vehicle with engine) who was the employee of Defendant D. (2) The Plaintiff requested Defendant E to sell the rocketings and carphers owned by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff requested Defendant E to transfer the ownership of the vehicle to Defendant D upon the request of Defendant E that “if the individual is the owner of the vehicle, it is anticipated that the vehicle will be sold, the vehicle will be transferred to the owner of the vehicle.” On July 22, 2016, the Engines will transfer ownership on September 22, 2016, and on September 22, 2016.

However, even though the above two vehicles were sold to a third party on October 2016, Defendant E, without paying to Plaintiff A the sales proceeds of KRW 16.5 million, was divingd on December 5, 2016.

3) Plaintiff B requested Defendant E to sell the sea lamps vehicles owned by it, and, upon Defendant E’s request that “to pay the price for the vehicle by transferring the vehicle ownership to Defendant D,” the ownership of the said vehicle was transferred on April 14, 2016 to Defendant D. However, even though the said vehicle was sold to a third party on August 2016, Defendant E was temporarily set off around December 5, 2016 without paying the sales price of KRW 40,400,000 to Plaintiff B. [this is without dispute between Plaintiff A, B and Defendant D, the fact that there is no dispute between Plaintiff A and Defendant D 1 through 3, and the overall purport of arguments, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the judgment by publication between Plaintiff A, B and Defendant E-Service by publication, and Defendant E-Service, respectively.

B. According to the facts of the above recognition 1, Defendant E is a direct tortfeasor who embezzled vehicle sales proceeds, Defendant D is an employer of Defendant E, respectively, the Plaintiff’s 16.5 million won, Plaintiff B’s 40.4 million won, and each of the above amounts.