(a) deliver a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet;

B. The delivery of the above automobile.

A. The Defendant B, as indicated in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff, by deceiving the Plaintiff to sell the instant motor vehicle (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”), is obligated to return the instant motor vehicle to the Plaintiff, and if compulsory execution is impossible, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 35 million, which is the market price of the instant motor vehicle.

(b) Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. The plaintiff alleged by the parties, on the ground that the defendant C occupies the motor vehicle of this case owned by the plaintiff, sought delivery of the motor vehicle of this case to the defendant C, and at the same time seek 35 million won, the market price of the above motor vehicle in preparation for the impossibility of compulsory execution of delivery of the above motor vehicle.

As to this, Defendant C asserts that he obtained permission from D to use the instant vehicle, and that he occupied and used the said vehicle, and returned it to D.

B. According to the judgment evidence No. 1 and the response of the Insurance Development Institute against the Plaintiff, it is recognized that the instant automobile was owned by the Plaintiff, and that Defendant C subscribed to liability insurance for the instant automobile from December 16, 2013 to December 16, 2015.

However, in light of the witness witness D's testimony, it is insufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is that Defendant C has occupied the instant vehicle, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, as to Defendant C, who is premised on the possession of the instant vehicle by Defendant C.