2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On December 5, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant and C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) on the supply of solar power generation equipment and facilities for solar power generation (hereinafter “instant goods”) to the Defendant’s solar power generation business site operated by the Defendant, and leased them to the Defendant. The Nonparty Company provided the Plaintiff with the supply, installation, and management of the instant goods, and the Defendant provided the Plaintiff with the service of paying rent and additional profit each quarter.

B. According to the instant lease agreement, the non-party company established and supplied the instant article at the Defendant’s solar power plant located in Young-gun D around that time, and provided the Defendant with management services of the instant leased object.

C. Meanwhile, at the time of the instant lease agreement, where the instant lease agreement was terminated or terminated within five years after the conclusion of the instant lease agreement due to the Defendant’s overall grounds, the Defendant agreed to compensate the Plaintiff for the amount calculated by adding an additional 50% penalty to KRW 200 million for the first supply of the instant goods.

(The main text of Article 17(2) of the Written Contract] / [Grounds for recognition] / [the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff a sum of KRW 300 million (50 million) plus a penalty of KRW 100 million (50%) as stipulated in the instant lease agreement, on the grounds that the instant lease agreement was terminated within five years from the date of conclusion of the contract, on the grounds of the Defendant’s overall reasons.

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 4, the defendant, around March 2017, filed a claim for damages with this Court No. 2017Gahap51539 on the ground of non-party company's non-performance of obligation.