A. The Plaintiff is a specialized credit finance company that deals with installment financing business, credit loans, or secured loans, etc. with authorization from the Financial Supervisory Commission.

The defendant runs the used car sales business in the name of "D".

B. On May 8, 2018, the Defendant entered into an inventory Financial Business Agreement (A evidence No. 5; hereinafter “instant Business Agreement”) with the Plaintiff to provide the Plaintiff with construction machinery and motor vehicles, the ownership transfer registration of which was completed under the name of the Defendant, as collateral and obtain loans.

C. In accordance with the instant business agreement, the Defendant concluded 23 loans with the Plaintiff as indicated below, and received each loan, but lost the benefit of time in violation of the agreement, such as disposal of automobiles, etc., which are collateral, without the Plaintiff’s approval, and the principal and interest of outstanding loans (amount repaid) under each loan agreement as of July 3, 2019 are listed in the following table.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 7 evidence (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 9.5% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate from July 4, 2019 to the date of full payment, with respect to the amount of KRW 55,413,342 in total, and the amount of KRW 486,30,00 (the sum of the remaining principal of each loan from No. 1 to 19) with respect to the agreed interest rate of KRW 9.5% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate of KRW 13,100 (the remaining principal of the loan from No. 20) from July 4, 2019 to the date of full payment (the sum of the remaining principal of each loan from No. 21 to 23) from July 4, 2019 to the date of full payment.

B. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1 is consistent with the conclusion that the Defendant concluded each loan agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff between 21 and 23, but each loan agreement between 1 and 20 between the Plaintiff.