1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 80,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its payment from October 27, 2014 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 28, 2013, the Plaintiff engaged in the business of printing Savian in the name of “C” requested the Defendant, who is engaged in the business of factory automation facilities (hereinafter “instant machinery”) to manufacture D and slot machines (hereinafter “instant machinery”) for KRW 480 million (excluding value-added tax), and paid KRW 60 million as part of the down payment to the Defendant on October 29, 2013.

B. On November 28, 2013, when the Plaintiff entered into the instant mechanical manufacturing contract with the Defendant, the date of completion of the manufacture of the instant mechanical device is until March 8, 2014, and the down payment of KRW 80 million out of the price is paid within one day after the contract was concluded, and the remainder of KRW 400 million is to be paid after the completion of the trial run, and the remainder of KRW 20 million was additionally paid to the Defendant on December 7, 2013.

C. However, the Defendant did not properly manufacture the instant machinery in order to pass the agreed completion date due to difficult financial circumstances and the aggravation of credit arising therefrom. On April 17, 2014, the Defendant agreed to return 80 million won, which was paid as down payment, to the Plaintiff by May 16, 2014, as down payment, up to May 16, 2014.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while delaying the return of the down payment, agreed to pay the Plaintiff the down payment amount until July 31, 2014, on the same day as the Plaintiff was granted an execution clause on the bill of exchange on June 23, 2014 and intended to commence compulsory execution. The Plaintiff permitted the Plaintiff to directly manufacture the instant machinery at the Defendant factory, support it without compensation, and pay the down payment amounting to KRW 80 million and the damages amount.

E. Accordingly, under the Defendant’s aid, the Plaintiff executed funds, such as material costs and wages necessary for manufacturing machinery at the Defendant factory, and directly manufactured the instant machinery, and installed it at the Plaintiff factory on July 20, 2014.

In addition, the Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff had ownership of the instant machinery around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] A. A. Articles 1 through 7, 10 to 10.