1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. Basic facts

A. From around 1995, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for automobile parts transaction with the Hyundai Motor and Hyundai Flus to produce and supply automobile flusor, and supplied the said company with automobile flusor, etc.

B. The Plaintiff subcontracted the manufacture of automobile fluor supplied to Hyundai Motors, etc. to Nonparty Co., Ltd., but for this purpose, the Plaintiff leased large-scale fluor producer to the said company without compensation, and the said fluor was transferred to the Defendant around May 2007, and the Defendant produced and supplied the automobile fluor from around that time to the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant rescinded the agreement on April 13, 2015, and the Defendant agreed to return the said producer to the Plaintiff at the time.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 9, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant did not return the goods listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant goods”) among the machine production facilities that the Defendant agreed to return to the Plaintiff. As a result, the Plaintiff incurred damages equivalent to KRW 63,915,174, which was caused by the Plaintiff’s failure to supply the machine to Hyundai Flus, etc., and was manufactured by using KRW 36,867,00. As such, the Defendant was obligated to deliver the instant goods to the Plaintiff and compensate the Plaintiff for the total damages incurred by the Plaintiff (i.e., KRW 100,782,174 (= KRW 63,915,174, KRW 36,867,00).

B. According to the result of the on-site verification conducted by this court, the fact that the Defendant occupied and used the instant goods. However, the instant goods are included in the loan agreement prepared by the Plaintiff and the Defendant around September 3, 2009, or a written agreement prepared on April 13, 2015, which included the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by adding the entire arguments to the descriptions and images of evidence Nos. 9, 10, and Eul Nos. 1 through 7.