Defendants are not guilty.

The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A is a used car dealer, and Defendant B is a relative with Defendant B.

1. Where a transferee of an automobile registered by the defendant A intends to transfer it to a third party, the transfer shall be made in his name before transferring;

Nevertheless, on June 29, 2015, the Defendant acquired a G Sspo-type car from F to F in the company selling cars that are next to D, the Government of the Gyeonggi-si, and thereafter, the Defendant transferred the car ownership registration to F on May 12, 2016, without making a transfer registration under the name of the Defendant.

As a result, the defendant acquired the automobile and transferred it to the third party without making a transfer registration in his name.

2. Any person who has taken over a motor vehicle registered by Defendant B shall apply for the registration of transfer of ownership of a motor vehicle to the City/Do Governor, as prescribed by Presidential Decree;

Nevertheless, on May 12, 2016, the Defendant did not file an application for the registration of transfer of ownership of a motor vehicle even when he/she received a G Spo-type car free of charge from a pro-Japanese (51 tax) in the said motor vehicle trading company.

2. The term “person who has acquired a motor vehicle” under Article 12 of the Automobile Management Act refers to a person who has acquired the ownership of a motor vehicle by legal acts, including sale and purchase or donation.

Therefore, even if the obligee is delivered to the obligor, if it is merely the delivery of the vehicle owned by the obligee as security of the claim without the agreement on the transfer of ownership, or if the obligee is delegated only with the authority to dispose of the vehicle as a substitute for the repayment of the claim, such obligee cannot be deemed to be “the transferee of the vehicle” under Article 12(3) of the Automobile Management Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do8503, Jun. 9, 2016). In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, Defendant A lent money to F and received the instant vehicle as security, and Defendant B is the same.