A. On September 16, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) decided to purchase each of the 2013-type discount and 2010-type discount vehicles that the Defendant repaired and sold from the Defendant; (b) paid KRW 13,000,000 to the Defendant for the low-priced vehicle; and (c) on September 18, 2014, KRW 12,000,000 to the Defendant.

B. The Defendant failed to deliver the said vehicles on the agreed date, and on October 8, 2014, delivered the Plaintiff’s 'Nevis vehicle’ until October 15, 2014, to the Plaintiff by October 5, 2014, and the low-priced vehicle by October 18, 2014, by October 5, 2014.

b. 'A letter of confirmation' stating that if a vehicle is late on a day, it is called 'A letter of promise to compensate for a daily amount of KRW 1,000 per day.'

(C) The Plaintiff prepared and delivered the Plaintiff. On October 26, 2014, the Defendant delivered the NAS vehicle to C on behalf of the Plaintiff, and on March 14, 2015, delivered the low-priced vehicle to C. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap 2 through 7, Eul 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, as the Plaintiff did not deliver to the Plaintiff at the time the Defendant promised to pay the low-priced vehicle, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 54,000,000 as a penalty for a penalty of 54 days from October 19, 2014 to December 11, 2014. As such, the Plaintiff asserts that part of the Plaintiff seek payment of KRW 50,000,000 and damages for delay.

As to this, the Defendant: (a) the Plaintiff and C forced the Defendant to prepare the instant confirmation document while avoiding disturbance at the Defendant’s workplace; and (b) the Defendant drafted the instant confirmation document; (c) the declaration of intent in the said confirmation document is null and void by coercion; and (d) the Plaintiff and C refused to accept the said vehicle, and thus, the Defendant did not have the obligation to pay the money as stated in the instant confirmation document, as it did not deliver the said vehicle; and (c) at the time of accepting the vehicle with the bid, C would not be held liable for the Defendant