1. The Defendant’s KRW 18,597,635 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from April 9, 2015 to June 26, 2015, and the following.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On October 23, 2012, the Plaintiff, among the container warehouses located in Daegu-dong-gu D from C on October 23, 2012, he/she is entitled to the instant electrical sets stored in the container warehouse No. 17,26,32,33,52, and 57 (hereinafter “instant electrical sets”).

(2) On November 1, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a storage contract with the Defendant to deposit goods by paying storage fees of KRW 150,000 per month for the storage of the said container at KRW 150,000 per unit (hereinafter “instant storage contract”).

3) Around 18:00 on November 5, 2012, around 18:00, C destroyed three consenting locks among the container stored with the instant electric sets, and stolen them with the door 700 copies of the electric sets, and thereafter, C was sentenced to imprisonment for 10 months at the Daegu District Court for criminal facts described in paragraph (3) of the same Article (Seoul District Court 2013Hun-Ma899), and the said judgment became final and conclusive as they were as they were the withdrawal of appeal by C. [In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, evidence 1, evidence 1-23 of evidence 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the entire arguments, and the purport of the whole arguments.

B. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to safely keep the goods with the care of a good manager as the custodian of a contract for commercial deposit. However, even at the time of the fact that the defendant did not discover all the crimes until the person, other than the owner of the goods, destroyed the locks of the container warehouse and carried out all the goods inside the container, and it was found only after the act of theft was completed. In light of these circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant failed to perform his/her duty of care as the custodian of the stored cargo, and therefore, it is reasonable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages incurred by the plaintiff due to the theft.