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

A. The Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter “Plaintiff Company”) is a company that engages in cargo transport arrangement business, etc., the representative director of the Plaintiff Company B, and the Defendant is a person who engages in the fore loan lending business.

B. Around August 2009, the Plaintiff Company entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the lease of 2.5 tons for the three and three tons for the three and three for the three for the three for the three for the three for the two for the three for the three for the three for the above lease and use.

C. In the event that the Plaintiff Company delayed the rent for the company, the Defendant applied for provisional attachment of the Plaintiff Company’s claim, such as the forek-car rent (the claimed amount of KRW 20,918,700) with respect to the claim for the storage rent and storage charge against the Plaintiff Company, and received a decision on provisional attachment of the claim under the Seogu District Court Branch Branch Decision 201Kadan445 on January 25, 2011.

(hereinafter “instant provisional seizure”). D.

On February 22, 2013, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff Company seeking to pay KRW 3,880,00 in total, fork repair costs and transport charges (Tgu District Court Seo Branch Branch Decision 2013Gadan4993). On February 2, 2011, the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking to pay KRW 2,10,650 in total, the penalty for early termination of the lease contract for the fork owner, KRW 15,380 in total, and KRW 3,880 in total.

E. On March 13, 2014, the court of the first instance rejected the Defendant’s claim on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge the remainder of the claim, excluding the amount of rents, penalty, transportation charges, and damages forkin rent, and damages.

Accordingly, from the appellate court (Tgu District Court 2014Na6037), the defendant appealed and dismissed the defendant's appeal on October 29, 2014 on the part of the rent, penalty, transportation fee, and claim for damages.

The Plaintiff Company appealed against the above appellate judgment, but the appellate court (Supreme Court Decision 2014Da82682) was dismissed on February 12, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition]