1. The Defendant terminated the consignment management contract on May 7, 2015 with respect to the motor vehicles listed in the attached list to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 28, 2003, the Plaintiff entered into an entrustment management contract (hereinafter “instant entrustment management contract”) with Nonparty Yong-gu Co., Ltd. (amended trade name: hereinafter “Seoyang Korea Co., Ltd.”) on the attached list (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) with respect to the automobiles owned by Nonparty Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”), and entered into an entrustment management contract with the purport that the Plaintiff would be entrusted with the right to operate and manage the instant automobiles from Nonparty Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the instant automobile”). The Plaintiff operated the instant automobile while paying the rent and the management fee, etc. to the Nonparty Co., Ltd.

B. On November 13, 2006, the Defendant acquired the instant vehicle from the non-party company and completed the ownership transfer registration under the name of the Defendant, and entrusted the Plaintiff with the operation and management right of the instant vehicle, thereby succeeding from the non-party company the status as a party to the instant consignment management contract.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff registered its business with the trade name “B” from around that time and operated the instant motor vehicle.

C. On May 7, 2015, a duplicate of the instant complaint containing an expression of intent to terminate the instant consignment management contract to directly engage in trucking transport services was served on the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the entrusted management contract of this case means that the plaintiff registers the motor vehicle of this case in the name of the defendant and vests its ownership, operation, and management rights to the defendant. However, in the internal context, the plaintiff, who is the borrower, is entrusted with his/her own operation management rights to operate and manage the motor vehicle of this case and pays monthly management fees to the defendant every month as remuneration for the operation and management of the motor vehicle of this case.