1. The Defendant’s KRW 33,004,235 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 6% from November 1, 2014 to December 15, 2014.

Around June 25, 2014, the Plaintiff’s determination as to the cause of the claim was made to the Defendant KRW 4,400,000, and the same year.

6. 30. Heat Exchange Equipment 26,869,700, and the same year.

7. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 3,04,235 won (hereinafter “price for the instant goods”) and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 20% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from November 1, 2014 to December 15, 2014, which is the delivery date of a copy of the instant complaint, from November 15, 2014, and from the next day to the day of full payment, to December 15, 2014, as the annual rate of 33,004,235 won (hereinafter “the price for the instant goods”), barring any special circumstance.

The defendant's assertion as to the defendant's assertion is based on annexed materials CO2 cent, CO2Hax, and Roter used in the heat exchange equipment (hereinafter referred to as "electric exchange equipment of this case") supplied by the plaintiff to the non-party Etex (hereinafter referred to as "Etex") around August 31, 2014 and around October 17 of the same year.

2. The supplementary materials of this case are “the supplementary materials of this case”

B supplied the Plaintiff.

Therefore, since the defendant has a total of 40,286,400 won for the above accessory materials to the plaintiff, the defendant does not have the obligation to pay to the plaintiff if offset is made.

The Plaintiff was supplied with the instant subsidiary materials by the Defendant, and was paid the price for the instant subsidiary materials by Eex, but was not paid the price for the instant subsidiary materials by Eex, thereby unjust enrichmenting the amount of the said price for the goods.

Therefore, since the defendant offsets the above claim for return of unjust enrichment, there is no obligation against the plaintiff.

The plaintiff is unable to comply with the plaintiff's request because the plaintiff did not issue the warranty bond to the defendant.

The defendant does not pay the price claim of the goods of this case by provisional seizure.