A. The Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”). In this case, Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant Company’s obligation to the Plaintiff under the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff.

C

B. Meanwhile, at the time of the instant lease contract, the Defendant Company entered into an agreement that “if the Defendant Company delays monthly rent more than two consecutive times, the Plaintiff shall delay the performance of the obligation and accordingly, shall notify the Defendant Company of the termination of the instant lease contract at least three business days before the termination date of the contract, and may claim the return of the automobile (Article 20(2) of the Terms and Conditions). In the event the contract is terminated, the Defendant Company entered into an agreement that the Plaintiff shall pay the fees for early termination or statutory damages according to the method of disposal of the automobile (Article 20(4) of

C. The Defendant Company delayed 1,799,800 won on two occasions. On April 10, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant Company of the termination of the instant lease contract, and the said termination notice reached the Defendant Company around that time.

As of April 30, 2015, the details of settlement following the termination of the instant lease agreement, which the Defendant Company should pay to the Plaintiff according to the instant lease agreement, are as follows.

E. Meanwhile, when Defendant Company returned the instant leased vehicle to the Plaintiff on May 15, 2015, the Plaintiff sold the instant leased vehicle and deducted the sales price of KRW 21,610,000 from the amount of the instant leased vehicle and the damages for delay incurred until August 21, 2015, the balance of the settlement amount remains KRW 4,109,152, including the amount of statutory damages, as well as the amount of KRW 3,925,873.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 5, purport of whole pleading

2. According to the above factual basis, the defendants jointly and severally concluded the lease contract of this case with the plaintiff 4.