1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 19, 2010, the Defendant completed the transfer of ownership registration in the name of the Defendant with respect to a vehicle at Quatian level (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) in Quatian A84.2 in 2006.

B. From April 14, 2011 to October 2, 2014, the Plaintiff received a request for repair of the instant vehicle from Nonparty D and completed repair.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 3 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff asserts that as long as the plaintiff accepted the automobile owned by the defendant, the defendant is liable to pay the repair cost.

However, there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff received from D, not from the Defendant, a request for repair of the instant motor vehicle.

Furthermore, D was delegated by the Defendant with the authority to repair contracts.

There is no assertion as to the fact that when the plaintiff received a request for the repair of the motor vehicle of this case, the defendant is asked about whether to accept the motor vehicle of this case and received the direction.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion that the repair cost under the repair contract for the automobile of this case is not the party to the contract, but the defendant is merely the owner is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff also asserts that the Defendant, the owner of the instant automobile, has a duty to return unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff, since the Defendant, who is the owner of the instant automobile, also takes advantage of the repair cost.

In the event that the contractual performance comes to the benefit of a third party as well as the other party to the contract, if the party to the contract who performed the performance directly claims the return of unjust enrichment against the third party, not only the contract would transfer the risk burden under the contract under its own responsibility to the third party, but also would result in a violation of the basic principles of contract law.