1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal and the incidental costs thereof shall be individually considered.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the following is added to the sixth sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

“The plaintiff (it does not dispute the facts that the rent for the vehicle of the plaintiff is KRW 6,00,000” on the sixth day for pleading in the first instance trial. The plaintiff asserted that the rent for the vehicle of the plaintiff does not reach the above KRW 6,00,000. This constitutes cancellation of a confession in the trial. In a case where there is no consent of the other party as to cancellation of a confession in the trial, in order to cancel it, the person who asserts revocation of a confession must prove that the confession would be contrary to the truth and due to mistake (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da30646, Nov. 11, 1997). However, the statement on the evidence No. 32 of the first instance trial alone is insufficient to deem the confession as contrary to the truth, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Even if it is contrary to the truth, the plaintiff's assertion that the above confession is ordinarily valid from the court of first instance based on the type of evidence acknowledged prior to the above facts, the number of days used, the amount of days used, etc., and the above vehicle fee.

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion with the conclusion. Thus, both the defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.