1. The Defendant shall complete the payment of KRW 42,406,139 to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, as well as KRW 41,585,761 from April 27, 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 28, 2016, the Plaintiff (Withdrawal) provided three high-ranking vehicles as collateral to the Defendant, and leased KRW 66,50,000,000,000 to the Defendant for a loan period of 48 months, the principal and interest equal repayment method, the repayment of principal and interest equal repayment method, the interest rate of 10.9% per annum, and the delayed interest rate of 25% per annum.

(hereinafter “instant loans”). (b)

The Defendant lost the benefit of time on January 3, 2018, as stipulated in the terms and conditions, because it was impossible to pay the installment in time.

C. On February 2, 2018, the Plaintiff transferred the claim for loans under the said loan contract to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim on or before the 6th of the same month, and the Plaintiff withdraws from the lawsuit in this case.

The Defendant’s above loan obligation remains 41,585,761 won, and the interest or interest interest accrued until April 26, 2018 is 820,378 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 5 to 7 evidence (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor KRW 42,406,139 (= KRW 41,585,761 KRW 820,378) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 25% per annum under the agreement from April 27, 2018 to the date of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. A. Around December 2017, the Defendant sold the vehicle to Nonparty B, and the Defendant decided to accept the Defendant’s instant loan obligations against the Plaintiff.

However, B did not repay the loan of this case to the Plaintiff.

Since the defendant also filed a lawsuit against B (Tgu District Court Branch 2017Kadan687) against the defendant, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

B. We examine the judgment, and even if B assumed the debt of the loan of this case as the defendant's assertion, the above facts are not proven to have been accepted by the plaintiff as the creditor.