1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

The court's reasoning concerning the cause of claim and the defendant's argument is the same as the part concerning "1. Judgment on the cause of claim" and "2. Judgment on the defendant's argument" among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

It shall be deemed that the agreement of penalty is appropriate ex officio for the reduction of the estimated amount of compensation.

If the Defendant did not return the instant forest by August 29, 2012, the promise to pay 20,000 won per day from the following day is presumed to be an agreed penalty for breach of contract to be an liquidated damages (see Article 398(4) of the Civil Act). Article 398(2) of the Civil Act provides that where the estimated amount of damages is unreasonably excessive, the court may reduce the estimated amount of damages to a reasonable extent. As such, where the estimated amount of damages calculated pursuant to the agreement is deemed to be unduly excessive beyond the permissible extent by the general public, taking into account all the circumstances, such as the status of the parties to the contract, the purpose and content of the contract, the motive behind the scheduled amount of damages, actual damages, the comparison of the estimated amount of damages and the estimated amount of damages, transaction practices

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da1386 delivered on September 4, 2002). The defendant, when purchasing a secondhand furniture, etc. in D operated by the plaintiff, lent 10 days gretification to the office wall of this case without any particular consideration when opening the business. In light of the above circumstances, use, method of storage, etc. of the forest of this case, the forest of this case is merely a stolen forest, not a high-priced forest.

In addition, it is difficult to view that the penalty of KRW 20,00 won is expected that it will continue without the upper limit regardless of the value of the forest in this case.

In addition, on July 29, 2015, the Plaintiff was handed over the instant forest by the Defendant.

If there are circumstances, from August 30, 2012 to July 29, 2015.