1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 30,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual interest thereon from October 29, 2016 to July 7, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 13, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for transfer and takeover of freight trucking services with the Defendant for a large-scale A special vehicle under the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

B. The Plaintiff transferred KRW 30,000,000 to the financial account on January 9, 2013, as the acquisition price for the freight trucking services.

C. On December 8, 2015, the Plaintiff operated the instant vehicle after changing its registration number to C. On the instant vehicle, the Plaintiff registered the instant vehicle to be permitted to supply a special motor vehicle (a special motor vehicle for salvage) to a special motor vehicle with limited supply by forging a notification of acceptance of a report on the scrapping of the instant motor vehicle from Jincheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and received notification that it would be scheduled to suspend the operation after confirming it as a motor vehicle violating Article 3(3) of the Trucking Transport Business Act.

On April 11, 2016, Jincheon-gun notified the Plaintiff that the instant vehicle was ex officio cancelled in the trucking transport business permission register on the grounds that the Plaintiff did not comply with the Plaintiff, even though the period for the replacement of the instant vehicle was given to the Plaintiff as to the instant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 3 through 8, 10 through 12 (including branch numbers if there is a tentative number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant transferred the freight trucking service on the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff, and the instant vehicle was found not to be used normally for the freight trucking services and was revoked in the freight trucking service license register, and thus, the Defendant failed to perform the obligation under the freight trucking service contract.

Therefore, the plaintiff is responsible for compensating for damages equivalent to the plaintiff's acquisition price.

B. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant is the plaintiff.