1. The defendant is based on the transfer from the plaintiff on January 18, 2007 of the motor vehicle stated in the separate sheet.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 19, 2002, the Plaintiff completed the ownership transfer registration with respect to the automobiles listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant vehicles”).

B. On August 2002, while operating the instant vehicle, the Plaintiff: (a) borrowed KRW 300 million to a credit service provider; (b) entered into a payment agreement in lieu of disposing of the instant vehicle when the said loan obligation is not satisfied; and (c) provided a credit service provider with documents, such as a certificate of personal seal impression necessary for the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant vehicle; and (d) handed over the instant vehicle.

C. A credit service provider acquired the ownership of the instant vehicle in accordance with the foregoing payment agreement because the Plaintiff was unable to repay the foregoing borrowed money, but the credit service provider disposed of the instant vehicle to a third party without registering the transfer of ownership on the instant vehicle.

On June 9, 2014, the Plaintiff was investigated as a suspect of violation of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act by a third party who did not register the transfer of ownership even after taking over the instant vehicle and operated the instant vehicle without mandatory insurance. Upon receiving a notice of payment of an automobile tax or a fine for negligence, the Plaintiff reported the instant vehicle as an illegal owner of the instant vehicle (tentatively named vehicle).

(Reference to Evidence A 32 out of Evidence A 1) / [Grounds for recognition] Class A 1 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and its judgment

A. As to the claim to accept the transfer of ownership registration procedure, in light of the circumstances that the Plaintiff used the instant vehicle as an insurable vehicle from January 18, 2007 to September 30, 2007, the Defendant acquired the instant vehicle from a credit service provider or a third party who acquired the instant vehicle from the Plaintiff pursuant to the payment in substitutes agreement, and thus, the Defendant acquired the instant vehicle from a credit service provider or a credit service provider. Therefore, the purport of Article 12(1) of the Automobile Management Act is to be stated.