1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) whose exchange has been changed in the trial of the party shall be added in the primary main claim and the trial of the party.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs the textile salt processing business, etc., and operates the system (making drawings and specifications, satising the pattern to be chined into the original body) and the plate (making the mold to be used in chroping operations) to which the Defendant applied for the processing of fibers as requested by the Defendant. The Defendant is a company that exported the fiber yarn to the Plaintiff in a foreign country.

B. The Plaintiff performed the garment of the Textiles yarn as requested by the Defendant from around 2004 to February 2014, and the transaction process is as follows.

① If the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to produce a complete salt sample from a foreign buyer, ② the Plaintiff send the complete salt sample produced by requesting the production of the complete salt sample from the external seller to the Defendant, ③ the Defendant’s adoption of the complete salt sample to be used for the actual salt work, and then send a written request for direct water processing to the Plaintiff, ④ the Plaintiff shall supply the complete salt sample to the Defendant in accordance with the complete salt sample.

C. The process that the Plaintiff and the Defendant settled the salt price during the aforementioned transaction period is as follows.

① If the Plaintiff completed the delivery and then sent a claim for salt price to the Defendant at least twice a month, the Defendant shall send to the Plaintiff a written settlement statement stating the balance remaining after deducting the Defendant’s damages, etc. due to the defect in goods from the claimed salt price, and ③ If the Plaintiff accepts it and send the tax invoice stating the amount to the Defendant, the Defendant shall pay the settlement amount specified in the tax invoice to the Plaintiff.

The Defendant, around March 11, 2014, after the transaction was terminated, indicated as “the settlement amount calculated by deducting KRW 55,162,415 from the amount of damage caused by the defect in the goods from the salt price accrued until the time,” and “the settlement amount calculated by deducting KRW 57,147,795, which was KRW 57,145,00 from the additional input in the course of the amloak (Evidence No. 1; hereinafter “instant settlement statement”).