1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver movable property listed in the separate sheet;

B. The movable property described in the above paragraph (a).

1. Basic facts

A. Nonparty C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) was supplied with the front part of the front-time vehicle for infants from June 2014 to E according to the goods supply contract with Nonparty D (hereinafter “instant goods supply contract”). The Defendant is a person who is the above D and is the representative of the above E.

(E) There is no legal personality, and the defendant's personal business. (b)

On the other hand, in the course of supplying the parts of the pre-paid car for young children to the Plaintiff, E obtained from the Plaintiff the movable property in the attached list of KRW 52,091,452 (hereinafter “instant movable property”), which is owned by the Plaintiff, from the Plaintiff, and used it in the production of the pre-paid car parts for young children.

C. After that, the Plaintiff merged C on September 8, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant movable property provided E with the instant movable property so that E can produce and supply the front-time parts for young children using the instant movable property. However, since the instant goods supply contract was terminated and the supply of the front-time parts for young children to the Plaintiff was terminated, the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant movable property, as the representative of E, sought the return of the instant movable property to the Defendant who actually occupies and uses the instant movable property based on its ownership, and where it is impossible to execute the delivery of the instant movable property, the Plaintiff, as the owner of the instant movable property, sought payment of KRW 52,091,452, the value of the instant movable property

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) A person who actually occupies the instant movable is not D but the Defendant. 2) Even if the instant movable is possessed by the Defendant.

Even if the Defendant had the right to possess and use the instant movable property based on the instant goods supply contract, and the instant goods supply contract was not terminated.

3. Determination

(a) Each of the entries and arguments in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), as a whole, in the judgment on the cause of the claim.