1. The Defendant’s ground for termination of title trust on April 28, 2015 is limited to the Plaintiff’s automobile indicated in the attached list.

1. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is the plaintiff's fraudulent act, the plaintiff purchased a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "the instant motor vehicle") around January 8, 2015, and agreed with the defendant to register the instant motor vehicle as the defendant's ownership (hereinafter "the instant title trust agreement"), and according to the above agreement, on January 13, 2015, it is recognized that the transfer registration of ownership on the instant motor vehicle was completed under the defendant's name on January 13, 2015, and the fact that the plaintiff terminated the instant title trust agreement and requested the procedure for the transfer registration of ownership on the instant motor vehicle was delivered to the defendant on April 28, 2015, and therefore, it is apparent that the instant title trust agreement was terminated as a delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the instant motor vehicle to the Plaintiff on April 28, 2015, which was based on the termination of title trust.

As to this, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff donated the automobile of this case to the defendant's wife around February 2015, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this, and therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.