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...

According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the automobiles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the "automobile of this case") are owned by the plaintiff, and the fact that the defendant currently occupies the automobile of this case does not conflict between the parties.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to deliver the automobile of this case to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

The defendant asserts that the defendant has the right to possess the motor vehicle of this case since it was delivered by C for the purpose of securing the plaintiff's claim against C around February 2015.

In this case, there is no argument or proof that C had the right to dispose of the instant automobile, and the Defendant cannot acquire any real right right to the instant automobile. Thus, the Defendant’s argument is without merit without further review.

(B) A. (A.) An automobile can only be the object of a mortgage under Article 9 of the Act on Mortgage on Specific Movables, including Automobiles, and cannot be the object of a pledge, which is a real right to secure possession for the guarantee of credit. As such, an agreement between the defendant and C, which assures the obligation by having the defendant who is the creditor of the automobile in this case, occupy the automobile in this case, shall be null and void, and as long as the defendant did not complete the ownership transfer registration for the automobile in this case, the right to transfer a security for the automobile in this case cannot be deemed to have been established, and the defendant's assertion that there is a legitimate right to possess the automobile in this case is without merit). Accordingly,