1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the goods listed in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 6, the facts such as the entry of the cause of the claim in the annexed sheet shall be recognized

2. Article 70 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that “The commencement of rehabilitation procedures shall not affect the right to redeem any property that does not belong to the debtor from the debtor.”

In addition, the Supreme Court held that " Even if the court in receipt of an application for commencement of composition procedure prohibits the repayment to the debtor as a preservative measure under Article 20 (1) of the former Composition Act before making the decision, the disposition is effective only on the debtor as a matter of principle, so it is prohibited that the debtor's repayment would be made at will, and the creditor of the debtor shall not be prohibited from exercising the right to terminate the procedure due to the delay of the payment (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da9856, May 10, 2007)." This legal principle equally applies to the rehabilitation procedure.

Therefore, even if the Plaintiff entered into a financial lease agreement with Dorael Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Dorael), and then applied for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings, there is no obstacle to exercising the right to terminate the above financial lease agreement on the ground that the rehabilitation company did not pay rent to the Plaintiff, even though the rehabilitation company did not pay rent.

As long as the financial lease contract is terminated, the plaintiff who is the owner of the goods listed in the attached list can claim the return of the object of financial lease as an exercise of the right of repurchase.

According to Eul evidence No. 1, this Court is recognized that the court issued a preservative order to the rehabilitation company on April 17, 2018 in the rehabilitation case 2018 Gohap511, but it is subject to the restriction on the disposal of the rehabilitation company, even if based on the written decision.