1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 21,700,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from November 1, 2009 to October 20, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 17, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract for medical appliances for diagnosis (a model name MAGFIND-A13000, hereinafter “instant medical appliances”) with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

-The purchase price of KRW 313,00,000 (Provided, That the value of the medical device for diagnosis previously used by the Defendant is assessed to be KRW 150,000,000, and thus the Plaintiff accepted by the Plaintiff; accordingly, the purchase price that the Defendant actually paid to the Plaintiff is KRW 163,00,000 (payment at the same time as the conclusion of the contract) - The remainder of KRW 146,70,000 (payment within 30 days after the completion of the installation of the instant medical device)

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract for maintenance and repair of the instant medical institution (hereinafter “instant maintenance and repair contract”) with the following contents attached to the instant contract.

- Maintenance and repair costs: 1,100,000 won per month; Term of contract: while the defendant uses the medical device in this case;

C. On September 2009, the Plaintiff installed and placed the instant medical device at the hospital operated by the Defendant.

Under the instant sales contract to the Plaintiff, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 35,820,00 for the remainder of KRW 16,300,000 on July 30, 2009, KRW 70,000 for the remainder of December 30, 2009, and KRW 35,000 for the remainder of March 31, 2010 [30,820,000 for the remainder of the above amount] to the Plaintiff. KRW 4,180,00 for the repair cost of KRW 4,180 for the medical device repair company Mta Korea (the medical device part of this case occurred due to a defect in the air-resistant habiting season, and its repair cost was KRW 4,180,00 for the Plaintiff’s repair cost with the consent of the Plaintiff and with the payment of the above purchase price.

) On May 29, 2010, the sum of KRW 141,300,000, including the remainder of KRW 20,000,000, was paid.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul Nos. 1 to 5,

9. Each description of 10 or 13 cards (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 is that of the purchase price of this case, 163.