1. The defendant shall deliver the vehicle listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. On October 31, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired an automobile listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant automobile”) and completed the ownership transfer registration as to the instant automobile on November 14, 2012. The instant automobile does not conflict between the parties, or may be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings in the entry in the evidence No. 3.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to deliver the automobile of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner of the automobile of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defense

A. The defendant asserts to the effect that the defendant, while lending KRW 25 million to B, had been provided as security the instant vehicle, has a legitimate right to possess the instant vehicle.

B. According to the evidence No. 2, No. 5, No. 1 through 4, and No. 7, the Plaintiff’s former B borrowed KRW 25 million to the Defendant on December 5, 2012 and charged the Defendant with the instant vehicle. The Plaintiff asserted that he/she is the actual owner of the instant vehicle, and that, if the Defendant is unable to pay the above loan, he/she did not object to the Defendant’s arbitrary disposal of the instant vehicle, he/she may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff renounced ownership of the instant vehicle and agreed with the Defendant that the Defendant would not object to the Defendant’s arbitrary disposal of the instant vehicle.

However, an automobile can only be the object of a mortgage under Article 9 of the Act on Mortgage on Specific Movables, such as Automobiles, and cannot be the object of a pledge, which is a real right to secure possession for the guarantee of credit. Thus, the above agreement between the defendant and B with the purport that the defendant can secure the possession of the automobile of this case and dispose of it voluntarily at the time of default in order to secure loan claims against B is null and void as it violates the above Act prohibiting the establishment of a pledge, and the defendant completed the ownership transfer registration for the automobile of this case