The Defendants shall deliver to the Plaintiff the goods listed in the attached list of movables.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company running a business with the aim of facility leasing business, installment financing business, or other specialized credit business, and entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants on movable property listed in the attached list with the Defendants (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”). In the event that the Defendants were in arrears on two or more occasions, the Plaintiff lost the benefit of time, and the Plaintiff was able to terminate the instant lease agreement.

D

B. The Defendants did not pay the lease fees under the instant lease contract more than twice. The Plaintiff lost the interest of the term to the Defendants, and notified the Defendants that KRW 34,918,533, which was calculated as of January 30, 2020, should be redeemed halfway. However, the Defendants did not comply with the instant lease contract, and filed the instant lawsuit on February 13, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Uncontentious facts, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are obligated to deliver to the Plaintiff the movables listed in the attached movable property list as the restitution following the termination of the instant lease agreement.

As to this, the Defendants asserted to the effect that the procedure of this case ought to be interrupted, since the Defendants filed an application for general rehabilitation with the Daegu District Court 2020dan101 on February 12, 2020, and accordingly the decision was rendered on May 7, 2020.

On the other hand, if the lease company has declared its intention to terminate the lease contract before the prohibition of repayment takes effect through the commencement of rehabilitation procedures, such termination shall be valid, and prior to filing an application for general rehabilitation, the defendants already terminated the lease contract of this case on the grounds of the defendants' default of lease fees.

Therefore, the plaintiff can claim the return of the attached movable property list, which is the object of the lease, as the exercise of the right to repurchase.