1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the part of the "1. Basic Facts" among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant alleged that the instant vehicle was unlawfully operated between January 2012 and July 2016 by the Plaintiff. As a result, the Plaintiff sustained damages equivalent to KRW 29 million and KRW 25,543,380 for the said period.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a total amount of 31,543,380 won.

B. The following circumstances, which can be seen by comprehensively taking account of the evidence and evidence set forth in subparagraph 3 and subparagraph 2-1 and 2-2 prior to the occurrence of the liability for damages, and the overall purport of the argument as a result of the market price appraisal conducted by the appraiser F of the party appraisal, i.e., the defendant paid 20 million won to the person holding the vehicle of this case to the person holding the vehicle of this case, and then received the vehicle of this case as security with the claim of 30 million won against the plaintiff, but it is difficult to recognize the defendant's submission of evidence. However, the defendant's submission of evidence can not be seen as having taken over the vehicle of this case. ② The documents delivered by the defendant as the price of the vehicle of this case did not exceed 35 million won at the time of the above vehicle of this case, including sales contract, and thus it is difficult to view it as a normal and orderly transaction method. ③ The defendant did not transfer the vehicle of this case to the owner of this case for 4 years to 16 months, but did not use the vehicle in its name for 16 months.