1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. According to the following grounds of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff seeks implementation of registration procedures, such as the statement in the purport of the claim, against the Defendant.

① In the case of a claim for divorce, etc. between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, Incheon District Court 2013Ddan12402, the Defendant transferred the instant automobile ownership to the Plaintiff by means of division of property according to divorce on August 14, 2013.

See the application for modification of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim made on August 25, 2015. (2) The initial motor vehicle was only the name of registration in the name of the defendant, and the actual owner was the plaintiff. The plaintiff terminated the title trust by the conciliation on August 14, 2013 or by the delivery of the complaint of this case.

(3) The Defendant made an oral promise to the Plaintiff to transfer the registered name of the said automobile.

(A) On June 15, 2015, reference to the answer for civil procedure, as of June 15, 2015, to the foregoing argument is considered first.

The conciliation clause established in the case of divorce, etc. is as follows, and among the conciliation clause, the fact that the defendant's property division includes a clause (2. A.) to transfer to the plaintiff the ownership of "Seocheon-gu Land and its Ground Buildings" as property division, there is no dispute between the parties.

The plaintiff is entitled to mediation clause 2. A.

In light of the purport that the instant motor vehicle belonging to the above company’s property is the object of the division of property, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to deem that the instant motor vehicle belonging to the above company’s property is the object of the division of property.

A. It is insufficient to recognize that the instant motor vehicle is included in the conciliation clause, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, rather, the said conciliation clause specifies only “land and its ground buildings” as property division, and in 7.7.