1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 34,380,50 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from July 10, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 17, 2013, the Plaintiff leased to the Defendant the temporary materials necessary for the construction work on two houses of migrants newly built by the Defendant, at the lease rate of KRW 25,00,000, from June 15, 2013 to July 15, 2013.

B. After that, the Plaintiff additionally leased the temporary materials necessary for the construction work for one resettled house to the Defendant at a rent of KRW 12,500,000.

C. The Defendant paid only KRW 18,500,000 out of the total rent of KRW 37,500,000 to the Plaintiff.

On the other hand, on June 17, 2013, the Defendant agreed to compensate the temporary materials leased to the Plaintiff at the current market price, regardless of the reasons for cutting, destroying or dividing them.

E. The Defendant did not return to the Plaintiff each temporary material listed in attached Forms 1 and 2, and the sum of the market prices of the unclaimed temporary material is KRW 17,505,500.

[Ground of Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap's statements (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap's witness C and D's testimony, the whole purport of pleading / [Grounds of Recognition]

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the sum of the rent of KRW 19,000,000 ( = 37,500,000 - KRW 18,500,000) and the compensation agreed amount of KRW 15,380,50 ( = 17,505,500 - the compensation agreed amount of KRW 2,125,000 withdrawn by the plaintiff due to the non-return of 250).

3. The defendant's assertion is alleged to the purport that since the plaintiff did not supply properly the temporary materials, such as Gohaps and expendable materials, as stipulated in the contract for temporary materials lease, he purchased and used them to other wood stations, etc., the purchase cost equivalent to the purchase cost should be deducted. Therefore, there is no evidence to deem that the plaintiff did not lease the raw materials, etc. that the plaintiff intended to lease.

Rather, according to Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6, 8, and 9, each testimony of witness C and D, the plaintiff agreed to the defendant in the temporary re-lease agreement.