1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff movable property listed in the annexed sheet.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

A. The Defendant is a stock company established for the purpose of processing wind power generation and power generation facilities parts, industrial robots, and ELC's transport routes, robot processing, and assembling.

B. On October 2, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for president with which the Plaintiff would receive goods produced at the Defendant’s factory and provide subcontracted services. From October 2, 2008 to February 2014, the Plaintiff processed parts, etc. and supplied them to the Defendant under the above contract with the Defendant.

C. On March 17, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant regarding movable property listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant machinery”) as follows (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

Sales contract* Contract Amounting to KRW 270,00,00 in total, 270,000 in the machinery listed in the attached table of contract items (MT machinery) and the attached table of contract amount* The remaining payment date of payment: March 17, 2014 * The right to use the machinery from the present contract point of time * The Plaintiff has the right to use the machinery from the present contract point of time.

* The above sale and purchase of the facility will substitute for the outstanding amount payable from the defendant to the plaintiff.

* terminate, with the above purchase-price, the monetary responsibility of the outstanding amounts at present.

On March 24, 2014, the Defendant deposited KRW 235,781,249 for the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant deposit”) on the ground that the Plaintiff refused to receive the payment for the goods unpaid as a gold No. 499 of the Changwon District Court Branch was a deposit in order to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant deposit”).

E. The Defendant currently occupies each of the instant machines.

2. The parties' arguments and the issues of this case

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff decided to take over each of the instant machines from the Defendant instead of paying the unpaid goods to the Plaintiff, and concluded the instant sales contract with the Defendant, and the Defendant is obligated to deliver each of the instant machines to the Plaintiff. 2) Defendant 1 was the Defendant.