1. The Defendant’s KRW 95,356,491 as well as 5% per annum from May 29, 2013 to June 27, 2014 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Japan (hereinafter referred to as “Japan”) ordered TFT equipment (hereinafter referred to as “instant equipment”) from the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as “China”), and ordered it to Japanese CT company (hereinafter referred to as “CT company”).

CT used the instant equipment as its trade name, and requested the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff, prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, changed to the current trade name on March 25, 2013) to manufacture the instant equipment, and the Plaintiff accordingly produced the instant equipment, and then ordered the Defendant to pack the instant equipment according to the Jout-type packing method (hereinafter “instant packing method”) around 2012.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The packing method of this case is to put the contents into a wooden box after using an alzinium factoring, put them into a wooden box, and then put the wooden box into a vinyl.

This is a packing method that can safely maintain the contents from damp, dust, shock, theft, etc.

C. The Defendant received packaging guidelines from the Plaintiff and accordingly packed the instant equipment using the packaging method during the period from August 2012 to September 2012. At that time, the Plaintiff loaded the instant equipment in Busan port at that time.

As above, the instant equipment loaded was transported through Japan to the Yaman company located in China (the company that ordered the manufacture of the instant equipment; hereinafter referred to as "Yaman company"), opening a package, resulting in leakage inside the package, and resulting in melting and funging in a significant part of the instant equipment.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 3 through 7, 16 through 18, Eul evidence 1 and images, and not less than part of Eul evidence 2.