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

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

3...

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. 1) On July 15, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) with respect to the movable property listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant movable property”) owned by the Plaintiff at KRW 36 months, monthly rent of KRW 4,038,00 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and A is occupying and using the instant movable property by being delivered by the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant lease agreement. 2) According to Article 20(1) of the instant lease agreement, “If any of the grounds stipulated in Article 8(1) of the Framework Agreement on Credit Transactions occurs to a customer, a financial company may immediately terminate this agreement without notice and peremptory notice and claim the return of the leased property.” Article 8(1)3 of the Framework Agreement on Credit Transactions provides that “When a debtor becomes bankrupt and becomes bankrupt, a debtor shall immediately lose his/her obligation to return the leased property by paying back his/her obligation.”

3) On December 2, 2016, A filed an application for commencement of rehabilitation with the Daegu District Court 2016 Ma139 on December 2, 2016, and on December 21, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to A a notice stating that “In rehabilitation, the benefit of time is lost as of December 21, 2016 pursuant to Article 20 of the terms and conditions of the instant lease agreement and the contract is terminated,” and the notice reached A on December 22, 2017. Meanwhile, in the rehabilitation procedure, the rehabilitation order was issued on January 16, 2017, and the Defendant took over the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, since the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated, the defendant is obligated to deliver the movable property of this case to the plaintiff.

2. The defendant's assertion is based on the nature of rehabilitation security right for lease claims under the lease contract of this case.