1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 52,59,953 and the amount of KRW 52,364,203 from September 7, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company with the objective of installment financing business, facility leasing business, etc., and the Defendant is a company with the objective of automobile siren business, etc.

B. On July 7, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a facility lease agreement (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, whereby the lease fee of KRW 1,948,60 per month, the agreed period of the agreement of KRW 36 months, the remaining value of KRW 10,000 per annum, and the overdue interest rate of KRW 24% per annum.

C. The Defendant delayed the payment of the lease fees after the instant lease agreement, and the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on September 6, 2017 on the ground that the lease fees were overdue.

As of September 6, 2017 when the lease contract of this case was terminated, the Defendant’s debt amount calculated in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated in the instant lease contract is KRW 52,59,953 [the amount of compensation for delay is KRW 8,095,102 (the amount of compensation for delay is KRW 235,750,000 and the amount of compensation for delay is excluded.]

) The special settlement amount of the principal, such as early termination fees and unrepaid principal, KRW 53,57,928 - Lease Advance Refund KRW 9,053,077).

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In relation to the plaintiff's assertion that the defendant sought payment of the above KRW 52,59,953, which occurred due to the termination of the lease contract of this case against the defendant, the defendant asserts that the defendant did not prepare a loan application (Evidence A (Evidence A1) which was made at the time of the lease contract of this case, but forged D. The plaintiff did not deliver the vehicle of this case to the defendant. The plaintiff exported the vehicle of this case to Vietnam before the regular registration is completed and the defendant could not use the vehicle of this case, so the plaintiff could not respond to the plaintiff's claim.

B. (1) The facts of recognition (1) The Defendant Company became the representative director of C while taking office as the inside director of C and E on September 14, 2015, and E resign on June 21, 2016, and C is the representative director.