1. The defendant is paid KRW 117,00 from the plaintiff and at the same time, the defendant is stated in the attached list to the plaintiff.

Around November 201, the Plaintiff entered into an entrustment management agreement with the Defendant with the purport that the Plaintiff will transfer the ownership of the motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) to the Defendant; however, the Plaintiff entrusted the management and operation of the said motor vehicle by the Defendant to pay various expenses to the Defendant while operating the said motor vehicle.

The Plaintiff expressed to the Defendant the intent to terminate the instant contract by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint, and the duplicate of the complaint reached the Defendant on May 4, 2017.

【The ground for recognition】 In the event a vehicle owner and a vehicle transport business operator enter into an entrustment management agreement with the owner of the vehicle externally in trust with the vehicle owner in the name of the vehicle owned by him/her to the vehicle transport business operator and transfer his/her ownership and operation management right to the vehicle to the company to which the owner of the vehicle belongs, while operating the vehicle internally in his/her own account under his/her own account and paying a certain amount of management expenses to the company to which the vehicle owner belongs while operating the vehicle in his/her own account, the above entrustment management agreement is concluded in the form of a combination of title trust and delegation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da85324, Jan. 27, 2011). The owner of the vehicle and the owner of the vehicle in the position of the truster are in the position of the truster and the owner of the vehicle in the position of the title trustee unilaterally terminate the entry agreement between the party and the company to which it belongs and fully recover the ownership domestically

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da29479 Decided November 11, 1997, etc.). According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate the entrusted management contract concerning the instant vehicle reaches the Defendant on May 4, 2017, and thus the said contract was lawfully terminated. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is limited to the Plaintiff on the grounds of termination of the entrusted management contract as of May 4, 2017.