1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 62,00,000 and 5% per annum from May 1, 2014 to the date of full payment.

According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1 and 2 and the entire purport of pleadings, the plaintiff and the defendants (the seller, defendant C is not related to the sales contract of this case, but it is possible to trade articles owned by others. It is clear that the defendant C is indicated as the seller under the contract). On April 5, 2014, the defendant C's mother's e25 tons' truck under the name of Eul (hereinafter "the automobile of this case") purchased and sold at KRW 62,00,000, and the defendants reached the contract to cancel the right to collateral security registered on the automobile of this case (hereinafter "the contract of this case"). The plaintiff did not cancel the contract of this case from April 2, 2014 to April 30, 2014 to the defendant's account No. 620,000, and the defendants did not cancel the contract of this case.

According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that the contract of this case was lawfully rescinded, and the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 62,00,000 and 5% interest per annum under the Civil Act from May 1, 2014 to the date of full payment.

Article 548(2) of the Civil Act provides that interest shall be added to the money that is returned as a performance of the duty of restitution due to the rescission of the contract from the date on which the payment was made. The repayment of interest falls within the scope of the duty of restitution, and it does not fall within the nature of the return of unjust enrichment. Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings provides that the monetary obligation shall be fulfilled in cases where a judgment ordering the performance of the obligation is rendered.