1. The Defendant’s KRW 24,136,80 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from March 5, 2020 to January 13, 2021.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 3, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) on Dbenz E300 vehicles owned by C (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

Lease Period: From July 4, 2017 to July 4, 2021: Purchase or return after the termination of KRW 1,507,100:

B. On July 3, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a vehicle use contract (hereinafter “instant vehicle use contract”) with the Defendant, under which the Plaintiff would receive KRW 727,100, out of the monthly rent under the instant lease contract (hereinafter “monthly subsidy”) each month from the Defendant, as follows:

The instant vehicle use contract includes the same terms and conditions as attached Form 1 (hereinafter referred to as “instant terms and conditions”).

Term of contract for use: from July 3, 2017 to July 2, 2018, the monthly payment of KRW 1,507,100 to KRW 727,100 (by July 22, 2018).

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 22,90,000 to the Defendant the instant vehicle under the instant vehicle use contract, and operated the instant vehicle by receiving monthly subsidies from the Defendant from the Defendant from July 2017 and paying rent to the lessee.

The instant vehicle use contract was renewed on July 3, 2018.

(d)

The defendant paid monthly subsidies to the plaintiff by January 22, 2019, but did not thereafter pay them.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over recognition, Gap 1, 4, 5, Eul 1, 2, 4, 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The amount claimed by the plaintiff.

(a) 1,8320,00 won (=290,000 won - 4,580,000 won (=10% of the security deposit x 2 years) among the security deposit;

B. Damages amounting to 21,085,900 won for unpaid monthly subsidies or monthly subsidies (=29 months from February 2, 2019 to June 2021 】 727,100 won per month)

3. Determination

A. 1) In full view of the purport of Gap's termination 9, 10 and the entire arguments, as shown in attached Table 2, the defendant's application for termination of the agreement and the written consent, stating that "the selection of "the rate of deposit at the time of return shall be 20%" is deemed to be a clerical error in the "san". The plaintiff shall be deemed to be a clerical error in the "san".