1. The Plaintiff, the Defendant Company B, the 19,946,177 won for Defendant C, and the 4,550,000 won for Defendant C and each of them from March 25, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant C to purchase an agricultural electric temperature machine produced by Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) for KRW 13.9 million (hereinafter “instant hot blast”), and paid down payment KRW 4.55 million to Defendant C.

B. The oil boiler is used in the general wrusium located in Jeju-do. Only in the orchard operated by the Plaintiff and E, the electric ion wind of the same species produced by the Defendant Company was used, and the Defendant C did not sell electric ions to others.

C. The Defendant Company made publicity by stating that heating costs of 70% are saved compared to the oil boiler on the front page advertising the instant hot flag, and the chief of the Defendant Company headquarters F and the Defendant C explained to the Plaintiff.

Defendant C, who entered into an agency contract with the Defendant Company, had the complete wind of this case produced by the Defendant Company, and only performed the supply of electric power resources without any separate assembly process.

E. From December 29, 2013 to 500 square meters of Plaintiff’s citrus greenhouse, the Plaintiff operated the instant hot gas in a citrus greenhouse. On January 8, 2014, Defendant C confirmed the occurrence of the same occurrence in the course of operating the electric ions installed in E’s citrus wrusium, and confirmed the occurrence of the same occurrence in Myanmar in the course of operating the electric ions installed in E’s citrus citrus, and the phenomenon in which the citrus

F. On January 11, 2014, Defendant C listened to the Plaintiff’s speech that the instant hot wind season should not operate, and confirmed that Defendant C visited the Plaintiff’s walsium and visited the Plaintiff’s walsium to check that there was no error in the operation of the instant hot wind season.

G. On January 13, 2014, Defendant C received a request from the Plaintiff for A/S, and confirmed the operating situation of the instant hot wind, but notified the Defendant Company upon the Plaintiff’s request for A/S on the 15th of the same month, and the Defendant Company.