1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Fact 1) The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures steel structures, and the Defendant is engaged in the business of removing and installing steel structures, construction, etc. 2) The Defendant proposed to purchase to the Plaintiff the steel structure that can be recycled as the building by the Defendant, which was removing three steel structures from the Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, and C factory (hereinafter “the removal workplace of this case”), and the Defendant agreed to purchase the removal materials of this case from the Defendant in total of KRW 15 million, including the cost of removal, KRW 12 million, and KRW 15 million.

3) Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid KRW 15 million to the Defendant, including KRW 10 million on July 9, 2013, and KRW 5 million on July 10, 2013. 4) However, the Defendant decided to sell the instant removal materials to D around July 6, 2013, prior to selling the instant removal materials to the Plaintiff, and had already received KRW 3 million on the down payment, and from around July 12, 2013, D removed and transported the instant removal materials from the instant removal site.

5) Upon finding that the removal materials of this case were sold twice to D, the Plaintiff resisted to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and D agreed that the removal materials of this case that can be recycled into the building would bring D upon consultation with each other, and that if the Defendant sold scrap metal, the Plaintiff would return KRW 15 million received from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff. 6) Since then, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with KRW 3.1 million of scrap metal materials that cannot be recycled into the building instead of the removal materials of this case. However, the Plaintiff could not recycle the said scrap metal materials as the building, and that there was no method of recycling the said scrap metal materials as the building, and that there was a storage problem, the Plaintiff contacted the Defendant several times to settle the said scrap metal materials with KRW 15 million, and it did not contact with the Defendant, which is equivalent to KRW 3.1 million.