1. As to vehicles listed in the separate sheet, the Plaintiff’s share, Defendant A’s share, Defendant B and C’s share, respectively, 2/7.

Facts of recognition

On June 10, 2014, the network E entered into an entrustment management contract with the purport that the ownership of the instant vehicle reverts to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff is entrusted with the right to manage and operate the instant vehicle, under which the Plaintiff would pay a certain amount of management expenses and bear the obligation to pay taxes, public charges, insurance premiums, penalties, etc. (hereinafter “instant entrustment management contract”). Defendant D guaranteed the obligation under the network E’s entrustment management contract on the same day.

At the time of the entrustment management contract of this case, the Plaintiff and the Deceased agreed that the Plaintiff may unilaterally terminate the contract when the Deceased fails to pay the management expenses, etc. for more than three months.

The sum of the monthly management expenses, etc. to be paid by the deceased is KRW 242,00, and the deceased operated the instant vehicle from June 10, 2014 to December 23, 2016, the deceased delayed totaling KRW 6,320,470.

On August 20, 2016, the Deceased died, and at the time of death, Defendant B and C, the spouse of the deceased, filed a qualified acceptance report (Yan District Court Decision 2016Ra774) on December 16, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] A without any dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole argument is to determine whether the deceased's termination of the entrusted management contract of this case did not pay management fees for more than three months, and the plaintiff acquired the right to terminate the entrusted management contract of this case, and the plaintiff's duplicate of complaint containing his/her expression of intent to terminate the entrusted management contract of this case is obvious in the record that the plaintiff's statement of intent to terminate the entrusted management contract of this case reaches the defendant A, B, and C on January 31, 2017, and the defendant D on January 19, 2017. Thus, the entrusted management contract of this case was lawfully terminated.

Defendant A, B, and C’s obligation to take over the ownership transfer registration procedure for the instant motor vehicle, and Defendant A’s share for 3/7 shares, Defendant B, and C’s share for 2/7 shares, respectively, are based on the termination of the above consignment management contract on January 19, 2017.