1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the goods listed in the attached list.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

. The manufacture of each of the instant products was entrusted and settled. G did not comply with us with the trading relationship and did not contact with us.

Since each of the products of this case entered by G into your company is owned by our company, it is impossible to transfer them to anyone without our permission.

“Around that time,” the Defendant sent a certificate of content, and around that time, the Defendant received the said certificate of content. D. On April 1, 2016, 11, and 22 of the same month, the Defendant did not confirm the products of this case at the time of ear’s visit, and confirmed only the products of this case 2.

When sending a certificate of content, it is only formal custody, and it is only our speech, and the content was kept without viewing.

There is no evidence that there has been no contact for three years, and there is no evidence to prove that there has been no contact, and it is an unfair master.

We do not pay compensation.

3,400,000 won for storage of the instant two products for three years (=1,00,000 won *34 months from June 2013 to March 2016).

No container shall be transferred when the storage fees are not paid.

“The” sending the certificate of content to the Plaintiff on September 6, 2016, and on September 20, 2016, the Plaintiff is liable to return only the instant two products traded with G, and the Plaintiff is not liable to return it to the Plaintiff.

There is no fact that the products of this case 1 and 3 are kept in itself.

‘A’ sent the certificate of content to that effect.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. After the Plaintiff’s assertion was known that each of the instant products was kept by the Defendant after the contact with G was cut off, the Plaintiff clearly identified that each of the instant products was owned by the Plaintiff with the content certification, and then visited the Defendant’s place of business to verify the current status of storage of each of the instant products, and requested the Defendant to keep them in custody continuously. The Plaintiff and the Defendant accepted this.