1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and the appeal.

Basic Facts

On June 26, 2013, the Plaintiff manufactured cargo lifts to the Defendant and contracted the construction work installed at the Plaintiff’s factory located in Busan Seo-gu (hereinafter “instant construction work”) with the contract amount of KRW 22 million (hereinafter “additional value separate, KRW 8 million for the intermediate payment of KRW 8 million at the time of establishment of the contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 6 million at the time of completion of the trial operation, and six major contracts after the payment period (hereinafter “instant contract”). On September 17, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant increased the contract amount to KRW 25 million by changing the output of the production on September 17, 2013 from “Sastst” to “sast-gu”.

By January 7, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 188 million to the Defendant as down payment and intermediate payment.

The Defendant produced tension lifts (hereinafter “instant lifts”) and suspended the work while being installed by transporting it to the Plaintiff’s factory around April 2014 and recovered the instant lifts.

The defendant currently keeps the lifts of this case.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 3-5, Eul evidence Nos. 3-5, and the summary of the argument of the parties to the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff defendant did not comply with the size of the Rip and concrete Gu, which is the place of installation, but did not complete the installation work after discovering the defects at the time of installation, and did not contact thereafter.

Therefore, the plaintiff legally rescinded the contract of this case on the ground of the defendant's default of obligation, and the defendant is obligated to return the amount paid to the plaintiff.

Since the Defendant refused to accept and install the instant lifts in face-to-face meeting the doping that the Defendant had delayed payment period or had ordered the Defendant to pay back, the reason why the Defendant had not completed the instant construction is attributable to the Plaintiff.

The defendant does not have the obligation to return the amount already paid to the plaintiff.

However, it is recognized that it is impossible to install the instant lifts in concrete section.