1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s lawsuit seeking confirmation of the absence of the obligation to return the purchase price against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

The main lawsuit and counterclaim are also examined.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants are engaged in a used car sales business under the trade name of “G” from Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu.

B. Plaintiff B was granted all the power of representation for the sale of an automobile listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant automobile”) from Plaintiff A.

C. On January 1, 2016, Plaintiff B set the instant vehicle at KRW 29.5 million at a used car sales site, and on January 14, 2016, Plaintiff B agreed to purchase and sell the instant vehicle from H and the instant vehicle by calls from H to purchase the instant vehicle.

On the other hand, Defendant D received a telephone from H to buy the instant vehicle, agreed to purchase the instant vehicle under the name of Defendant C, and notified H on January 14, 2016 that he would purchase the instant vehicle, and notified the purchaser of the personal information of Defendant C as text messages.

E. On January 20, 2016, Plaintiff B prepared a motor vehicle transfer certificate (for the motor vehicle dealer transaction) that sells the instant motor vehicle at KRW 18 million with Defendant D’s delivery on January 20, 2016 (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”), and transferred all of the documents necessary for the registration of the transfer of ownership to Defendant C, the buyer of the instant motor vehicle, to Defendant C.

F. Defendant D deposited the purchase price of KRW 18 million into the account of the IJ of the Korea Exchange Bank IJ, an account known by H.

Defendant D’s payment of the purchase price as above and the Plaintiff B’s defect with the delivery of the instant vehicle had not yet been paid to Defendant D, and there is a dispute between the two parties that “Defendant D shall keep the documents necessary for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant vehicle, but not absolute change in the name until the court’s decision was made, and Plaintiff B shall not absolute the operation of the instant vehicle until the court’s decision was made.”