(a) The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the respective descriptions of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including the branch numbers for those with a serial number), Eul evidence 1, 2, and 4, and the overall purport of the pleadings:

1) On March 16, 2017, the Plaintiff is the Defendant and the low-priced container C vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

(i) with respect to the automobile facility leasing agreement in which the vehicle price is KRW 34,160,00, monthly rent of KRW 710,000, monthly rent of KRW 48 months, early termination fee rate of KRW 35%, annual rate of delay compensation, KRW 25%, annual rate of delay compensation, and KRW 14,938,000 after maturity (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

(2) At the time of the instant lease contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract. The instant lease contract may be terminated if the Defendant delayed the monthly rent more than twice consecutively, and if the Defendant wishes to return the automobile for the reason of earlier termination, the Defendant agreed to pay the earlier termination fee determined by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to calculate the fee for earlier termination [the purchase option vehicle price (the purchase option price after the remaining lease maturity x the early termination fee rate] . (2) The Defendant, while taking over and using the instant vehicle, did not pay the monthly rent from July 2017 to July 3, 2017 after paying the monthly rent.

3) On September 1, 2017, the Plaintiff’s employees found the Seoul detention center located in the Defendant’s possession on two consecutive occasions, and explained the settlement relationship following the termination of the instant lease agreement and requested the return of the instant vehicle, and the Defendant’s wife returned the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff via the consignee on the same day. (b) According to the above recognition fact, according to the instant agreement, the Plaintiff’s declaration of termination was made on the grounds of delayed delay at least twice a month, and the instant vehicle was lawfully terminated on September 1, 2017, when the Plaintiff returned the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff.