1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. On December 24, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Samsung Transport Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Samsung Transport”) filed a lawsuit against each other against the other party in Seoul Southern District Court 2016Kadan201726 (main claim) and 2016Kadan23757 (Counterclaim) seeking the implementation and acquisition of the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership of automobiles based on the termination of the above consignment management contract.

On July 5, 2016, the above court decided to recommend reconciliation that “Defendant Samsung Transport shall implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership on the instant automobile to the Plaintiff on December 24, 2015 due to the termination of the above consignment management contract, and the Plaintiff shall take over the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership on the said automobile from Defendant Samsung Transport on December 24, 2015.”

On July 23, 2016, the decision of recommending reconciliation was finalized on July 23, 2016 because both the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not raise any objection.

[Judgment of the court below]

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Although the Plaintiff intended to register the transfer of ownership by a decision to recommend reconciliation that became final and conclusive between Defendant Samsung Transportation, Defendant Samsung Transportation was unable to register the transfer of ownership because it did not cooperate in the transfer registration procedure because it did not issue the documents required under the law, etc., and thus, it is liable to compensate for damages caused by nonperformance of its duty

B. Even if it was impossible to transfer the name to the Plaintiff under the relevant laws, such as the Automobile Transport Business Act, Defendant Samsung T&T was an incorporated company specializing in the above entrustment contract, and thus, it was known whether it is possible to transfer the registration. Therefore, the Plaintiff is responsible for compensating for the trust benefits suffered from the belief that

Even if it is not so, since the defendant's obligation to transfer the name to the plaintiff was impossible, the defendant as the subject claim is the number plate of the plaintiff.