1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be paid below is revoked.

1. On June 16, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants jointly leased part of the factories operated by the Defendants (hereinafter “instant factories”) in the wife population D, and then installed the Plaintiff’s early-wave emitting machine (hereinafter “the instant landing machine”) in the above factory. The Defendants did not return it up to the date despite the Plaintiff’s request for return of the instant landing machine.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly have the obligation to pay to the Plaintiff 6,52,20 won as consolation money (i.e., 12,952,220 won - 6.5 million won) and damages for delay, respectively, as well as to pay damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. A. around June 16, 2013, the Plaintiff leased part of the instant plant from the Defendants at KRW 500,000 per month (excluding electricity tax separately) and installed two parts, etc. of the instant plant. The Defendants, at least from May 27, 2014, occupy the instant landing machine until the date. The Plaintiff demanded the Defendants to return the landing machine from May 27, 2014. The Defendants’ refusal of the Plaintiff’s demand for the return from around that time did not conflict with the parties, or can be recognized by the entire purport of the pleadings and arguments. Accordingly, the Defendants’ refusal of the return of the landing machine without justifiable grounds constitutes tort against the Plaintiff (the Defendants against this case cannot refund the landing machine to the Plaintiff until the rent, etc. for the instant plant is paid, but the Defendants’ assertion to the purport that the Plaintiff’s refusal of the refund of the landing machine does not constitute a justifiable ground for rejection of the rent for the instant plant.

However, the plaintiff is against the defendants.