1. On December 26, 2017, the Defendant made the termination of the entrustment contract with respect to the attached list vehicles from the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 27, 2013, the Plaintiff Company entered into an entrusted management contract (hereinafter “instant entrusted management contract”) with the Defendant on the attached list of vehicles (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

B. However, since 2015, the Defendant failed to timely pay management expenses, general insurance premiums, taxes and public charges, etc., and on December 2017, 2017, the Defendant sent notice that the total amount of the outstanding amounts will be KRW 4,924,230, and the Plaintiff Company would terminate the instant consignment management contract as of December 26, 2017 if the accounts receivable, etc. under the instant consignment management contract are not settled by December 26, 2017.

C. However, the Defendant failed to resolve the outstanding amount, etc. by December 26, 2017.

【Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap's evidence 1 through 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff Company may unilaterally terminate the instant consignment management contract pursuant to Article 16(1)2 of the instant consignment management contract.

Thus, according to the plaintiff's notification, this case's entrusted management contract was terminated on December 27, 2017.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to take over the transfer registration procedure from the plaintiff on December 26, 2017 with respect to the attached list vehicles on the ground of the termination of the entrustment contract.

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant’s assertion to the effect that the termination of the instant consignment management contract is illegal, rather than intentionally causing the outstanding amount, but merely because of its lack of funds, etc., it cannot be deemed that the termination of the instant consignment management contract was illegal on the sole ground of such assertion. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit without examining it.