1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The facts following the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap witness C and Eul's testimony and the whole purport of the arguments.

On October 7, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase the intermediate engine (hereinafter “instant engine”) as specified in [Attachment List 1 and 2 (hereinafter “instant engine”) from the Defendant on the purchase price of KRW 250,000,000 (excluding value-added tax) and paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 100,000,000 on that day.

B. The Defendant delivered each of the instant engines to the Plaintiff on October 8, 2008, and the spare parts listed in the separate sheet No. 3 of October 10, 2008 (hereinafter “the instant reserve parts”) to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff paid all remainder, including value-added tax, to the Defendant around that time.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant did not deliver to the Plaintiff the instant engine one speed, two speeders, two speeders, remote control devices necessary for the operation of the steering gear, engine unloading certificate, and name plate, which led to the Plaintiff’s failure to install the instant engine on board the vessel.

Accordingly, on January 14, 2013, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the delivery of the said goods by January 25, 2013. On February 13, 2013, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to deliver the said goods again, and issued a declaration of intent to cancel the instant sales contract in the event that the said goods are not performed by February 18, 2013 while requesting the Defendant to deliver the said goods again.

Therefore, the instant sales contract was impossible to achieve its purpose due to the Defendant’s nonperformance, and on that ground, the instant sales contract was cancelled by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent for cancellation on February 13, 2013, and thus, the Defendant’s restoration to its original state, along with the delivery of each item listed in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff, as well as the purchase price of KRW 275,00,000, including value-added tax, to the Plaintiff.