1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver the beam beamline in the annex 1 list;

B. Delivery of the above goods.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs provided the Defendant with a service of transporting soil and sand at the Seo-gu Incheon Construction Site (hereinafter “C site”), Seo-gu, Incheon, which was executed by the Defendant. The Plaintiff Pac Development Co., Ltd. did not receive transportation costs of KRW 53,385,00, and Plaintiff Eac Industry Development Co., Ltd., Ltd. from the Defendant.

B. On September 22, 2016, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant concluded a contract with the following terms (hereinafter “instant payment contract”).

1. The defendant confirmed that the freight transported by the plaintiffs on the C site that the plaintiffs had executed is unpaid as follows:

Plaintiff

Gac Development Co., Ltd. 53,385,00 won 198,792,000 won

2. In order to secure the payment of the above amount payable, the defendant shall transfer the 800 sn beam beamline of the above plaintiffs as payment in lieu of the above plaintiffs' payable amount.

Provided, That the number of the sn beam beams increased or decreased by settling accounts at the heavy price at the time of taking out, up to the price limit.

The plaintiffs are divided by themselves in proportion to the amount of the transferred beam beam.

4. The defendant confirms that the sloping beamline at the site does not have any compulsory execution or other rights of others.

The outstanding claim shall expire when the 1,200 tons of all the sn beam beamline transferred or taken out.

C. On October 15, 2016, the Defendant carried 75 tons of the 1,200 tons of the sn beam beamline at C at C (hereinafter “instant sn beamline”) to the construction site located in D Kimpo-si (hereinafter “D site”). D.

On January 26, 2017, the Defendant repaid KRW 15,000,000 to the Plaintiff Pada Development Co., Ltd.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, witness E's testimony, purpose of whole pleading

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. As seen earlier 1, as seen earlier, the Defendant’s 53,385,000 won for Cda Development Co., Ltd. and the Plaintiff.