A. On January 31, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) on the file files files files files (HCA-10, HCA-160, HCA-200), 3 sets, 1 set of national presses (PCS-200D), 39 months from January 31, 2012, 200 acquisition cost, 270,000,000, annual interest rate of 8.6%, annual overdue interest rate of 25% (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Defendant A’s representative director, as a joint and several liability of the Plaintiff under the foregoing lease agreement, was jointly and severally guaranteed by the Plaintiff.

Defendant A entered into a transfer security agreement with the Plaintiff on the file press (HCA-160) 1 set forth a transfer security agreement with the Plaintiff to secure the obligation under the above lease agreement on the same day.

B. Since November 2012, Defendant A delayed the payment of rent under the instant prior lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed to sell a national press frame (PCS-200D) 1 sets and appropriate the overdue rent.

C. On May 23, 2013, the Plaintiff sold the national frame (PCS-200D) for KRW 41,000,000 to the general trade of the non-party corporation, non-party corporation, and appropriated the purchase price to pay the overdue lease fee of the Defendant A.

From May 2013, Defendant A began to delay the payment of rent under the instant prior lease agreement, and around November 2013, the Plaintiff was delegated by Defendant A with the authority to dispose of the file presses (HCA-110) 1 sets (HCA-110) and sold it to KRW 31,00,000.

E. The Plaintiff appropriated the above sales price to pay the overdue rental fee of Defendant A, but failed to pay the overdue rental fee. On November 14, 2013, the lease term is 36 months from November 14, 2013, with respect to the file frame (HCA-160, HCA-200), which is a leased object remaining with Defendant A, and the unit of 1 sheet (mLF-60E) (hereinafter “the lease object of this case”) (hereinafter “the lease agreement of this case”). The lease agreement of this case is deemed to be “the lease agreement of this case”).