1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver a motor vehicle indicated in the annexed motor vehicle;

(b) 10,135,744 Won and its corresponding;

1. De facto marriage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was resolved around August 2019.

On March 16, 2018, the Plaintiff used the instant automobile between C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant lease company”) and the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff owned the instant lease company, and the Plaintiff fully pays rent from March 16, 2018 to March 10, 2023, concluded a lease agreement for the automobile facility leasing (hereinafter “lease agreement”).

The instant motor vehicle is occupied by the Defendant even after the de facto marital relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated on August 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8, purport of whole pleadings

2. The defendant asserts that the lease contract of this case is concluded while the plaintiff and the defendant are in a de facto marital relationship, and should be subject to division of property after resolving a de facto marital relationship. Thus, the plaintiff cannot exercise the right stipulated in the lease contract of this case against the defendant as a civil lawsuit.

The fact that the lease contract of this case was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant in a de facto marital relationship is examined in the above basic facts.

However, the cause of the claim in this case is not the right of possession of the automobile in this case, the vicarious exercise of ownership of the automobile in this case under the lease contract in this case, the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment, and the division of property after the de facto marriage is resolved. Thus, the defendant's above assertion

3. Claim for the delivery of the instant automobile

A. The plaintiff himself/herself occupied the motor vehicle of this case, and the defendant, as he/she had been deprived of it, asserts that the defendant is obligated to return it to the plaintiff.

According to the statement No. 8, the Plaintiff’s automobile of this case to the Defendant during August 2019.