1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 83,090,003 and the interest rate of KRW 24% per annum from December 30, 201 to the date of full payment.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Fact 1) The Plaintiff is a permanent resident construction company on December 26, 2005 (hereinafter “foreign company”).

As regards vehicles benzS500, a facility leasing agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) between BenzS500 is as follows:

B and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation under the above contract for permanent construction of a corporation. - The seller (manufacturer): 218,842,720 won: Annual compensation rate for delay:24%: Lease charge for 42 months from the date of issuance of the certificate of receipt of the article: one time to 42 times, 4,480,000 won (specific vehicle tax, penalty, etc.) and thereafter, the non-party company lost its benefit under the terms and conditions of lease, and the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease contract on December 29, 201.

The details of the settlement amount to be paid by the non-party company to the Plaintiff according to the terms and conditions of lease are as follows as of December 29, 2011.

- - Lease fees in arrears - Lease fees in arrears: 44,800,000 won for late payment (24% per annum): 32,628,593 won for late payment: 65,660,00 won for provisional payment: 5,661,410 won for provisional termination fees: 661,60 won for the aggregate of KRW 0: 65,660,000 for 83,090,000 for 83,09,003, without any dispute: Facts that there is no ground for recognition, Gap 1-4, and the purport of all pleadings)

B. According to the facts found above, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff as a joint guarantor of the non-party company the amount of KRW 83,090,003 under the lease contract of this case and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 24% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate from December 30, 2011 to the date of complete payment, from the date following the termination date of the above contract.

2. The defendant's argument that the plaintiff's claim is unjustifiable since the defendant prepares an application for individual rehabilitation including the list of creditors. However, the plaintiff's claim cannot be rejected solely for the same reason. Therefore, the above argument is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is accepted on the ground of the reasons.