1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 172,043,129 and KRW 170,293,538 among them. From February 13, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 12, 2012, the Plaintiff leased Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) with the lease term of KRW 36 months, acquisition cost of KRW 300 million, monthly lease cost of KRW 5,838,744.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

Defendant A, a lessee, agreed to pay interest in addition to interest in arrears at 25% per annum if he/she delays the performance of the obligation to pay the lease fees at the time of the instant lease agreement.

C. Defendant B, Defendant C, and D, the representative director of Defendant A, jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation owed by Defendant A to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant lease agreement.

In order for Defendant A to continue to pay the lease fee, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on May 29, 2013 on the ground that Defendant A’s delinquency in paying the lease fee, and at that time, the intent of termination was reached by Defendant A.

E. The lease fee that Defendant A did not pay is KRW 172,043,129,00 in total, KRW 170,293,538 in principal as of February 12, 2014, and KRW 1,749,591 in interest for delay.

[Ground of recognition] With respect to Defendant D: The facts that the confession is deemed to have been made: the absence of dispute against Defendant A, B, and C; the entries in Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the above facts of determination, Defendant A is the principal debtor of the instant lease agreement, and Defendant B, C, and D are jointly and severally and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the agreed damages for delay calculated at the rate of 25% per annum from February 13, 2014 to the date of full payment, for the total amount of 172,043,129 won and the principal amount of 170,293,538 won among them.

As to this, Defendant A and Defendant B entered into the instant lease agreement and the instant lease agreement using the corporate sense of Defendant A and the personal seal impression of Defendant B, which Defendant A, a real manager of Defendant A, had been kept in the company without authority, and Defendant B directly participated in the conclusion of the instant lease agreement.