1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The defendant's argument on November 1, 201, stated as the date of preparation of the third letter of statement, that the defendant had already acquired the ownership of the instant vehicle and did not have any obligation to pay to the plaintiff any more than the amount to be paid to the plaintiff, and the defendant does not have any obligation to pay the third letter of statement to the plaintiff.

However, inasmuch as the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, in principle, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof evidence that denies the content of the statement, the court shall, in principle, recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da60065, May 27, 2005). There is no evidence to support the fact that the defendant reverses the content of the declaration of intent clearly stated in the third letter and actually does not bear any obligation against the plaintiff as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.