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

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s business transactional Plaintiff are merchants who manufacture and sell household products, etc. with the trade name “C” in Seoul.

The defendant has its principal office in Busan and aims at the development, distribution, etc. of educational informatization projects, educational assistive equipment and equipment and equipment.

The electronic table is a image education system that changes the contents of the e-mail, fingers, etc. on the monitor of Taebst PC into an electronic signal so that they can consular (power) on project, TV screen, etc.

The basic structure is the core of the electronic equipment realizing cinematographicization, and the plaintiff has designed, manufactured, and supplied the outer table of the electronic table, and each case of the internal package (including the design) by receiving the production orders from the electronic equipment companies including the defendant.

On August 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a contract between the Defendant and the Defendant for the manufacture of electronic tamperings and electronic tamping cases, and received advance payment of KRW 25,663,00 from the Defendant, and began transactions with the Defendant.

B. On January 2010, the Defendant: (a) concluded the instant electronic consignment supply contract; and (b) revoked part of the ordered volume of the order, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to design and manufacture one unit of the model of the electronic consignment products of the type of the Plaintiff, to display them to the electronic consignment exhibition held at the end of the same month on the end of the same month.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant’s D head and E division a written estimate of 100 of the case of electronic consignment (hereinafter “instant product”) to the Defendant’s D head and E division, and stated “10 vehicles (10 vehicles) in the remarks column,” and stated “the 2% agreement per 100 vehicles (Nego) in the ordering quantity at the 100 unit of ordering quantity,” and agreed on the design, unit price, etc. from time to time.

Afterwards, the plaintiff and the defendant agreed to supply 100 parts to 75,000,000 won, and on February 16, 2010.