1. The defendant shall deliver the motor vehicle recorded in the annexed register of motor vehicles to the plaintiff.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is registered as the owner of the motor vehicle recorded in the annexed register of motor vehicles (hereinafter referred to as "the motor vehicle of this case").

B. On June 4, 2013, the Plaintiff was parked on the street around June 3, 2013 at the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Police Station, Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, but filed a theft report to the effect that the Plaintiff was stolen.

C. Meanwhile, on April 25, 2013, the Defendant purchased KRW 8.3 million from the Nonparty claiming that the instant motor vehicle was A, and possessed the instant motor vehicle by the Nonparty, with the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression issued on March 20, 2013, and the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression issued on the same day, and with the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression C issued on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Class A evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the automobile of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner of the automobile of this case, unless it proves and proves that he has the possessory right to the automobile of this case.

B. On March 20, 2013, the summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) asserted that the Defendant’s assertion was unable to respond to the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that: (a) around June 4, 2013, the Plaintiff knew that C, a wife of the Plaintiff, sold the instant vehicle to a third party using the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression, certificate of application for issuance of resident registration certificates, etc.; (b) the Defendant was aware of the possession of the instant vehicle by lawful purchase of the instant vehicle from a third party other than the Plaintiff and C; and (c) the Defendant knew of the possession of the instant vehicle by forgery, forgery, and fabrication of private documents; and (b) thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with; and (c) the Plaintiff delegated the Plaintiff’s wife C or the Nonparty