1. The defendant completed D/O on May 4, 2010 with respect to the motor vehicles listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 4, 2010, a limited liability company E (hereinafter “E”) issued a mortgage registration (hereinafter “instant mortgage registration”) to the Defendant with respect to the automobiles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant automobiles”) as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “E”) with respect to the bond value of KRW 30,000,000,000,000.

B. On August 12, 2011, E had the Plaintiff registered the transfer of ownership on the instant motor vehicle, and Plaintiff B completed the transfer of ownership on July 26, 2013 as to 1/100 shares of the instant motor vehicle.

C. Meanwhile, on November 21, 2014, the Defendant filed an application for voluntary auction with the Suwon District Court G on the instant motor vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 3-1, 2-4 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs E registered the mortgage of this case in the name of the defendant as the I's actual operator of E's relationship with H in order to prevent the obligees' seizure of the automobile of this case, etc., and actually did not exist the secured obligation of this case.

Therefore, the registration of mortgage of this case is invalid because there is no secured debt, and thus, it should be cancelled.

B. The Defendant registered the instant mortgage in order to secure the above claims, on March 9, 2009, on the ground that the Defendant, while running the business of lease of Y, had the rental fee equivalent to KRW 19.8 million incurred by leasing Y to E, and the loan claims incurred by lending KRW 6 million to E on March 9, 2009.

Since the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the plaintiffs as to the automobile of this case was made through a false conspiracy mark, the plaintiffs are not legitimate owners of the automobile of this case.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proof as to whether there was a legal act establishing the secured claim at the time of the registration of the mortgage in this case.