1. The defendant shall deliver the vehicle listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff is the owner of the motor vehicle listed in the attached list (hereinafter "the motor vehicle of this case"), and the defendant can recognize the possession of the motor vehicle of this case. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the motor vehicle of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner of the motor vehicle of this case,

The defendant asserts that the defendant is entitled to occupy the automobile of this case, since he entered into a lease contract with C, an employee of the plaintiff, and received the automobile of this case.

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, the defendant paid KRW 13.5 million for the automobile of this case with C around May 2018, and used the automobile of this case from May 19, 2018 to May 18, 2019, and entered into a contract to receive the full amount of the deposit for lease deposit (hereinafter referred to as "the contract of this case") and received the automobile of this case from C upon the expiration of the lease term. However, it is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that C is an employee of the plaintiff or the right to lease the automobile of this case on behalf of the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the defendant cannot oppose the plaintiff's request for delivery under the contract of this case.

The plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.