The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 4, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits on the ground that the instant structure supply agreement entered into between the Defendant and the Italian company was agreed to resolve the dispute arising in connection with the instant structure supply agreement by international commercial conference arbitration in Paris, but the Plaintiff’s claim is seeking damages, etc. due to nonperformance that the Defendant violated the instant structure delivery agreement entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Examining the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the validity of the exclusive arbitration agreement, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined that, around October 2012, between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff first issued a product receipt certificate to the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to deliver the instant structure to the Plaintiff at the time of the Plaintiff’s request, or agreed to deliver the instant structure to the Plaintiff by February 26, 2013 at the meeting of February 18, 2013, the Defendant concluded an agreement to deliver the instant structure to the Plaintiff by February 26, 2013.

Examining the record, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal

3. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the court below held that the structure of this case where the defendant intended to exercise commercial lien is completed by the defendant's efforts and withdrawal, and that the ownership was original acquisition by the defendant. The defendant delivered the structure of this case to the plaintiff according to the supply contract of the structure of this case and transferred the ownership of the structure of this case to the plaintiff.