1. As to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 11,539,922 and the Plaintiff’s 9,305,870 among them, Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant)’s 17 April 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 12, 201, the Plaintiff entered into an entrustment management agreement with the Defendant to the effect that trucking freight truck B-math 3.5 tons of business type (hereinafter “instant automobile”) reverts to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant entrusted the Plaintiff with the right to manage vehicles, including transportation business, for the instant automobile, and paid management expenses to the Plaintiff in return for using the right to manage the instant automobile. The Defendant entered into the entrustment management agreement with the effect that the Defendant would bear the tax and public charges, insurance premiums, and penalty charges related to the instant automobile.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant consignment management contract”). B.

The plaintiff, while entering into the entrustment management contract of this case, agreed that the plaintiff may terminate the contract in case the defendant delayed the management expenses for not less than three months.

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking the termination of the instant consignment contract and the payment of overdue management fees, etc., upon the failure of the Defendant to pay the management fees under the instant consignment management contract for at least three months, and on April 16, 2015, the name of the owner of the instant automobile was transferred to the Defendant on the day when the instant lawsuit was pending.

C. Meanwhile, the sum of the overdue amounts of management expenses, taxes, public charges, taxes, insurance premiums, administrative fines, etc. agreed to be borne by the Defendant in the instant consignment management contract until the owner’s registration title is transferred reaches 1,539,922 won.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the factual basis of the judgment on the claim of this case, with respect to the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 11,539,922, including management expenses in arrears, and KRW 9,305,870 among them (amount claimed for amendment of the purport of the claim as of September 16, 2014), KRW 2,234,052 (= KRW 11,539,922 - KRW 9,305,870) that the Plaintiff sought, the Defendant served on April 23, 2015, following the date on which the application for amendment of the purport of the claim as of April 20, 2015 was served on the Plaintiff.