1. The defendant delivered the vehicle listed in the attached list to the plaintiff. 2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff entered into a installment sale contract with C Co., Ltd., the owner of the automobile listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant automobile”), and received delivery of the instant automobile.

On February 13, 2019, the Plaintiff entered into a siren contract with D, and delivered it to D, and D agreed that D shall be liable for the damage, damage, theft, loss, penalties, fines for negligence, etc. of the instant vehicle during the siren period.

The defendant obtained the delivery of the instant motor vehicle from D around June 26, 2019 and has been occupying and using it until now.

D On March 17, 2020, on March 17, 2020, requested the Plaintiff to settle the rental fee and acquire the instant vehicle.

[Grounds for recognition] According to the above facts of recognition as to Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including serial documentary evidence) and the claim for delivery of the whole pleadings, the defendant who occupies and uses the instant vehicle has a duty to deliver the instant vehicle to the plaintiff subrogated by the owner.

As to this, the defendant asserts to the effect that he has the right to possess the motor vehicle of this case until he receives the return of the invested money from D. However, the circumstance that the defendant asserts that the defendant has a legitimate right to possess it.

It is difficult to see otherwise, and there is no other evidence to accept the Defendant’s argument.

The Plaintiff’s assertion on the claim for payment before the gold bullion only the instant vehicle to D on June 26, 2019, and the Defendant illegally occupied and used the instant vehicle without returning it, without returning it. The Defendant acquired unjust gains equivalent to KRW 500,000 per month between the Plaintiff and D, which is equivalent to the rental cost, from March 2, 2019 to February 23, 2020, while driving the instant vehicle, while driving the instant vehicle from March 2, 2019 to February 23, 202, causing KRW 431,110 as penalty and fine for negligence, thereby causing damage to the Plaintiff, and thus, is obligated to compensate for this.

Judgment

The Defendant alleged the Plaintiff.