1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On February 25, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the lease of automobile facilities (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with respect to a vehicle indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) sold by the Domman Investment Company for a period of 60 months (hereinafter “instant vehicle”). The instant lease contract includes the following contents, and the Plaintiff signed the car acquisition certificate.

Article 3 (Responsibilities of Customers) (1) A customer may select the type, size, performance, etc. of his/her motor vehicle, and maintain and manage the motor vehicle with the care of a good manager after the acquisition of the motor vehicle, and the financial company does not bear the warranty liability of the

Article 7 (Acceptance and Registration of Motor Vehicle) (1) Customer will immediately inspect whether a motor vehicle has any defect in the motor vehicle and issue a motor vehicle takeover certificate to the financial company.

Article 8 (Postponement or Defect of Delivery of Motor Vehicle) (1) If any damage is incurred due to delay or defect of delivery of the motor vehicle, a customer may claim directly against the seller for compensation for damage.

2. The customer may not refuse the payment of rent and the performance of obligations provided for in this Agreement due to delay or defect in the delivery of a motor vehicle where he/she issues a motor vehicle takeover certificate pursuant to Article 7.

On February 27, 2013, the instant automobile was registered under the name of the Defendant from the Gichio Co., Ltd., the seller of the instant automobile.

【Reasons for Recognition: Each entry in Evidence A Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Since the Plaintiff’s delivery, there were defects in the instant automobile, which caused the instant claim, in the penture and the chilling machine.

The plaintiff, around the other hand, has cancelled the lease contract of this case on the ground of the defendant's non-performance of the obligation to deliver automobiles without defects, and restore the original status.