1. The defendant shall accept from the plaintiff the procedure for registration of transfer of ownership as to the motor vehicles listed in the attached list.

2...

Facts of recognition

The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the whole purport of the pleadings, and contrary to Eul evidence Nos. 5, the consent form in the plaintiff's name cannot be used as evidence since there is no evidence to prove the authenticity of the consent form. The above recognition is insufficient to reverse the above recognition only with the descriptions of Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and no other counter-proof exists.

The defendant and C have forged the application for the loan under the name of the plaintiff to submit it to the lending company, and have obtained the loan from the lending company for the purchase of the second class vehicle in the name of the plaintiff and acquired the loan by fraud.

B. On October 31, 2012, the Defendant, in collusion with C, forged a letter of installment financing (application) agreement under the Plaintiff’s name, submitted it by facsimile to D Company (hereinafter “D”), and filed an application for installment loan in the name of the Plaintiff with respect to KRW 11 million necessary to purchase an automobile listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant automobile”).

However, even if the defendant received a loan from D, he did not have the intention or ability to complete the loan, and he acquired the loan from D with KRW 11 million.

Accordingly, the Defendant acquired the instant automobile under the name of the Plaintiff around November 2, 2012, and operated the instant automobile from around that time.

C. In addition, on November 21, 2012, the Defendant, in collusion with C, forged the Plaintiff’s request for double loan under the Plaintiff’s name, submitted it by facsimile to E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and filed an application for installment loan in the Plaintiff’s name with respect to KRW 26 million necessary for purchasing Frocketing other vehicles.

However, even if the defendant received a loan from E, he did not have the intention or ability to complete the loan, and he obtained a loan of 26 million won from E and acquired it.

B. The defendant

paragraphs (c) and (c)

Criminal facts as stated in paragraph (1) were prosecuted (In Incheon District Court Decision 2013 High Court Decision 2013 High Court Decision 8051, etc.) and each of the above criminal facts on May 13, 2015.