1. The Defendant terminated the title trust on October 29, 2015 with respect to each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant: (a) purchased 200,000 won per 20 copies of the certificate of the personal seal impression from the Plaintiff; and (b) purchased 101 vehicles from the transferor; (c) decided to transfer the vehicles in the name of the Plaintiff, other than the name of the Defendant, to another place.

Around November 16, 2007, the Defendant purchased the C Kanche vehicle from D, the owner of the C Kanche vehicle, and transferred it to a third party without registering its transfer in its name, and without transferring it to the Plaintiff’s name, thereafter, transferred it to the owner of the P Kache vehicle at that time, and even from around that time to March 27, 2008, the Defendant transferred the vehicle to a third party without transferring it under the name of the Defendant, even if it acquired it over a total of 10

B. The Defendant was indicted for committing an offense in violation of the Automobile Management Act, and was sentenced to eight months from the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch on October 16, 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, it is determined that a title trust contract for each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet was concluded between the original defendant, and the above contract was duly terminated upon delivery to the defendant on October 29, 2015 of the application for amendment of the purport of the claim of this case, which was October 27, 2015, containing the expression of intent to terminate the contract.

As such, the defendant is obligated to accept the procedure for applying for the registration of transfer of ownership from the plaintiff on October 29, 2015 for each motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet from the plaintiff to its original state.

B. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant explained that the Plaintiff would suffer disadvantage to the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is groundless. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and as seen earlier, the Defendant stated in the separate sheet as above.