1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment on the grounds of claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On March 2014, the Plaintiff is a D6.5T truck from the Defendant’s agent C (hereinafter “instant truck”).

(1) The sales contract of this case is 65,000,000 won (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

() On March 31, 2014, C paid KRW 30,000,00 as down payment, KRW 16,500,00 as part of the intermediate payment on April 9, 2014, and KRW 10,000,00 as part of the remainder on May 9, 2014. Nevertheless, the Defendant did not register the transfer of ownership on the instant truck, but did not transfer ownership to the Plaintiff, thereby allowing another person to register the transfer of ownership, thereby making it impossible to perform the Defendant’s obligation under the instant sales contract.

For this reason, the Plaintiff cancels the instant sales contract by serving a duplicate of the complaint of this case.

3) Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 56,50,000,00 in total of the purchase price paid by the Plaintiff, and KRW 8,50,00 in total due to nonperformance (i.e., KRW 65,00,00 in the market price of the instant truck - KRW 56,50,000 in the purchase price returned - KRW 56,50,000 in the sale price to be refunded) as a result of restitution to the Plaintiff (i.e., the fact that the Defendant granted the right to represent the purchase and sale contract of this case to C cannot be acknowledged, and the seller of the sales contract does not necessarily be the owner of the goods. Thus, the Defendant is a subsidiary company of the instant truck, as a matter of course,

2) Rather, the following circumstances are revealed by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleadings in the statement of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, namely, ① the Defendant is merely a branch owner of the instant truck, and the actual owner and branch owner of the instant truck are not entitled to dispose of the instant truck, ② C stated at an investigative agency that the instant truck was sold to the Defendant, ② C was entrusted by F, and F was paid KRW 15,00,000 from C, ③.