1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff produced and sold industrial pipes, and the Defendant respectively. The Plaintiff entered into a contract with C(D) on July 12, 2012 with the goods listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant machinery”) within KRW 200 million and the date of production within 90 days, and accordingly received delivery of the instant machinery from C.

B. On June 11, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a management contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant management contract”) as follows.

1. From July 1, 2013, the defendant shall jointly manage all the rights concerning the operation of the company, excluding the fund management of the defendant company, by the defendant and the plaintiff.

The plaintiff establishes the machinery in the defendant's factory and transfers it to the defendant as a sales contract.

2. The Plaintiff Company E shall take part in the management of the Defendant Company, while the F Director shall take part in the Defendant Company.

3. The plaintiff shall settle the results of production, sale, and operation of textile and industrial ground pipes at the defendant's factory as of the end of each month (except for virtual leave costs), and shall report to the defendant by no later than the 15th day of the following month, and settle 50% of the profits from the entire world generated by the defendant after the last day of each month.

6. When it is difficult for the defendant or the plaintiff to continue his business, the defendant or the plaintiff must deliver to the defendant his/her intent to terminate the contract with written notice, and the business rights held by the plaintiff shall

C. On June 11, 2013, the Plaintiff drafted a free transfer contract for the instant machinery with the Defendant. On June 24, 2013, the Plaintiff sold the instant machinery to the Defendant at KRW 16,275,200 (50% of the Plaintiff’s shares out of the total installation cost of the instant machinery). However, on behalf of the Plaintiff, the Defendant offsets the installation cost of the instant machinery against the sales price, and concluded that the Plaintiff did not raise any objection thereto by consenting thereto.

(hereinafter “instant mechanical sales contract”). D.

On the other hand, the defendant from August 14, 2013 to May 15, 2014 to the plaintiff.