A. Facts 1) The Plaintiff processed machinery with the trade name “E”. Defendant C and Defendant D made gold-type production, etc. with the trade name “G”, and both the actual managers were Defendant B. Defendant C and D awarded a contract for the Plaintiff for the process of drilling to the original form of gold-type materials, which are part of the production process of soft. Accordingly, from October 201 to February 2013, Defendant C and D agreed to confirm that the unpaid price for the above processing, etc. was KRW 16,928,835, Defendant D parts, and Defendant D parts 26,071,165.

Defendant B, as an actual manager, agreed to jointly pay the unpaid amount with the Plaintiff at that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-6 evidence (including paper numbers), the result of the commission of appraisal of defects, the fact-finding results on the Uklimte, the purport of the entire pleadings

B. As to the Plaintiff, Defendant B and C jointly and severally liable to pay 26,071,165 won, and each of the above amounts, jointly and severally, to the Plaintiff, 20% per annum from October 25, 2014 to September 30, 2015, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment, pursuant to the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. There is a defect in the gold punishment produced by the Plaintiff of the Defendants’ assertion.

The defendants have a damage claim against the plaintiff due to its defect, which is set off against the plaintiff's obligation to pay the price.

B. In full view of the fact-finding results on Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 6 (including paper numbers), the result of the commission of defect appraisal, and the fact-finding results on the Elimte Co., Ltd., the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff is not the entire process of production of burt from the defendants.