1. The Plaintiff’s claim for registration of transfer of ownership against Defendant B and the Defendants’ claim for money.

1. Request for taking over the transfer registration procedures;

A. The Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant B, on March 16, 2012 upon the request of the Defendants, purchased an automobile listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant automobile”) and agreed with Defendant B to terminate the instant title trust on March 24, 2012 after completing the ownership transfer registration in the name of the Plaintiff, and agreed with Defendant B on March 24, 2012, the Plaintiff is obligated to accept the transfer registration procedure for the instant automobile on March 24, 2012.

According to Gap evidence No. 9 ex officio, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant Eul on November 17, 2014 against the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2014Da45444, and was sentenced on March 19, 2015, "Defendant B will take over the transfer of ownership registration procedure for the instant automobile on March 24, 2012," and the above judgment can be acknowledged as having become final and conclusive on April 4, 2015, since the lawsuit of this case, which had already been rejected, is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

B. The fact that the Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant C, upon the request of the Defendants, purchased the instant vehicle on March 16, 2012 and completed the ownership transfer registration under the name of the Plaintiff, and on March 24, 2012, agreed with Defendant C to terminate the said title trust does not exist between the parties.

Therefore, according to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C is obligated to take over from the Plaintiff the transfer of ownership registration procedure for the instant motor vehicle on March 24, 2012 due to the termination of title trust.

2. Claim for money;

A. Each of the administrative fines stated in the separate sheet (total 1,562,480 won) due to the instant vehicle operation by the Defendants requesting administrative fines, and the fact that the Defendants agreed to pay the fine to the Plaintiff is not a dispute between the parties. Thus, the Defendants do not have any dispute.