The claim of this case is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that: (a) around August 19, 2018, the Plaintiff kept 12,270 articles worth KRW 38,253,00 from around October 28, 2018 to around September 22, 2018, including others purchased from C Co., Ltd., in the Defendant’s warehouse; (b) held 189,489,00 won in total from around that time to September 22, 2018; and (c) held 42,840 articles, such as typical and sanitary implements, in the Defendant’s warehouse; and (d) taken out 38,253,000 won in total from around November 28, 2018 to around November 17, 2018; and (e) sought for the cancellation of the preliminary rental contract; and (e) on the basis of ownership of each articles listed in the separate list (hereinafter referred to as “the movable property in this case”).

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, it is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff is the owner of the instant movable property solely on the basis of the Plaintiff’s entries in the evidence Nos. 3 through 7 and the fact inquiry about the C Co., Ltd. in this court, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① Although the Plaintiff filed a complaint against D, the representative of the Defendant Company, on the charge of occupational embezzlement, the Prosecutor stated that “The person in charge of C Co., Ltd. stated in the telephone investigation that the instant movable property was sold through transaction with E, and in light of this, the instant movable property is deemed to have been purchased,” and that D was not subject to a disposition of non-prosecution as “no suspicion.”

② On August 21, 2018, C Co., Ltd. sold the Plaintiff, other than sanitary instrument, to the Plaintiff on August 21, 2018, and received the payment of KRW 363 million on January 16, 2019.

“The time or price of the transaction is different from the time or price of the storage that the Plaintiff asserts.