1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of claim

A. First, the Plaintiff asserted the termination of the above consignment management contract as a ground for seeking the acceptance of the transfer registration procedure for the instant automobile against the Defendant, but the above consignment management contract was concluded between the parties.

or there is no assertion or proof as to the specific content of the entrusted management contract.

(On the other hand, it is difficult to view the agreement of this case, which the plaintiff asserts as follows, as an entrusted management contract in its contents.

Next, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 4 million from the Defendant on January 2009, and delivered the Defendant a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet owned by him (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) as collateral. At the time, the Plaintiff concluded an agreement with the Defendant that “if the Plaintiff did not request the Defendant to recover the said motor vehicle after the lapse of three months, the Defendant is obliged to accept the transfer registration procedure for the said motor vehicle without any condition” (hereinafter “instant agreement”). Thus, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Defendant is obliged to take over the transfer registration procedure for the said motor vehicle.

In light of the above, even if the plaintiff decided to take over the transfer of ownership in accordance with the agreement of this case, which constitutes a promise of accord and satisfaction or a transfer of security against the defendant, the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that there was the agreement of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant. Even if such agreement was made, there is no evidence to support that the defendant had taken over the transfer of ownership in this case without any condition after the expiration of the time limit for agreement, as alleged by the plaintiff, and there is no evidence to support that the defendant had taken over the transfer of ownership in this

2. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is without merit.