1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person running D in Incheon Strengthening-gun C, and around 2015, expressed that the Plaintiff would export the hot gas sets owned by E to China.

B. On October 11, 2015, the Plaintiff was lent to E for one month with hot ramp and ramp. Upon the request of E, the Defendant visited the Plaintiff’s D and delivered to E with hot rupture 1 sheet, rupture 1 sheet, and rupture 2 sheet.

C. The defendant received the above goods from the plaintiff and prepared a certificate of acceptance with the following contents:

(hereinafter referred to as “the certificate of acceptance of this case”). The certificate of acceptance of this case shall be the date on which the certificate of receipt of this case is issued 1 tweet 1 tweet tweet 1 tweet tweet tweet 1 tweet tweet tweet tweet tweet tweet tweet tweet tweet tweet : The fact that there is no dispute on October 11, 2015 / the fact that Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 4, 7, and 8, the video of Eul

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion refused the Plaintiff’s demand for the lease of E, and the Defendant carried out the product on October 11, 2015, and the Defendant did not return it even though the Plaintiff demanded the return.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum totaling KRW 7,600,000, which is equivalent to the value of the Onnuri set (6,000,000) (6,000), balls (60,000), balls (400,000), 7,600,000 (60,000) and the lease fees for 26 months for the above goods (490,000 won per month x 26 months).

B. On the basis of the aforementioned evidence, the following facts are acknowledged: ① The certificate of acceptance in this case is merely the meaning that the Defendant confirms the acceptance of the goods, and the time of return and the value of the goods are not entirely stated in the certificate of acceptance at all, and the Plaintiff arbitrarily stated the “6 million won next to the heat set, when submitting the certificate of acceptance to the court at the court at the trial as evidence.”