1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 14, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a siren agreement to lend the movable property listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant machinery”) to the Defendant as KRW 36 months during the siren period, KRW 195,60,00,00 per month, and KRW 16,284,40 (hereinafter “instant contract”). Article 12(2)5 of the instant contract (hereinafter “instant termination clause”) of the same agreement provides that “if a siren user files an application for bankruptcy or rehabilitation procedure, or there is a reasonable ground to believe that it is difficult to continue his/her business, the Plaintiff may terminate this contract without a peremptory notice to the siren user, and if a siren user loses the benefit of time, and if there is considerable reason to deem it difficult to continue his/her business, the Plaintiff may terminate this contract.”

B. On May 29, 2015, the Defendant applied for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings as the Changwon District Court 2015 Gohap10027 on May 25, 2015 while using the instant machine in delivery under the instant contract, and was ordered to commence rehabilitation proceedings on June 25, 2015, but was decided to discontinue the proceedings on May 24, 2016.

On June 8, 2016, the Defendant again filed an application for commencement of rehabilitation procedures with the Changwon District Court 2016 Ma10020, and received a decision of commencement on July 7, 2016, a decision of authorization of rehabilitation plan on March 20, 2017, and a decision of termination of rehabilitation procedures on April 28, 2017.

C. On August 8, 2016, the Plaintiff reported the total amount of KRW 349,654,747, including the overdue charge and the claim for losses arising from early termination of the instant contract, as a rehabilitation security claim, in the rehabilitation procedure (2016 Mahap10020). Of them, KRW 287,105,00 as a rehabilitation security right, and KRW 62,549,747 as a rehabilitation claim.

On October 27, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted a preparatory document containing the purport that “the contract of this case is terminated on the ground that the Defendant was filing an application for commencing rehabilitation procedures,” and the said preparatory document was served on the Defendant on October 28, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant's summary of the plaintiff's assertion has filed an application for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings.