A. On December 23, 2012, the new car registration was completed in the name of the Social Services Company, which Meassenzened with CS500 L (hereinafter “instant vehicle”), and on December 12, 2016, the transfer of ownership was completed in the name of D, a director of the Plaintiff’s intra-company, and on March 5, 2018, the transfer of ownership was completed.

B. The actual user of the instant vehicle is E, and the Defendant was living together for a period of not more than one year with E and came to take place around January 2017.

C. However, around July 20, 2017, the Defendant around 23:28, at the first floor parking lot A located in the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, laid a brick on the front glass of the instant vehicle parked therein and destroyed it (hereinafter “instant damage”). D.

Around that time, 3,734,500 won was disbursed as repair costs.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Gap evidence 5-1, 2, Gap evidence 6-1 through 7, Gap evidence 7, 8, 10, Eul evidence 1, G's testimony and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's primary claim

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant vehicle. From December 12, 2016 to March 4, 2018, the Plaintiff registered a title trust under the Plaintiff’s name as a director of the instant vehicle. However, on March 5, 2018, the title trust relationship was terminated and registered under the Plaintiff’s name. 2) The Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 33,815,320 due to the Defendant’s damage, and thus, the Plaintiff partially claimed for payment of KRW 30,080,820 for damages.

B. Determination of acquisition and loss of the ownership of a motor vehicle is based on the principle that the acquisition and loss of ownership of a motor vehicle becomes effective by being registered and that ownership cannot be acquired unless otherwise registered

Even if there was a title trust relationship between the Plaintiff and the registered owner D at the time of the instant damage, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is entitled to assert ownership in an external relationship. Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to assert ownership in the instant vehicle.