The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are dismissed, respectively.

(b) Costs of lawsuit;

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff operated the automatic control device and electronic parts manufacturing business with the trade name of “D,” and the Defendants, as married couple, completed the business registration of the trade name of “E” in the name of Defendant B and operated the mechanical manufacturing business.

On December 20, 2013, the Defendants entered into a contract with the FF Association (hereinafter “NF Association”) to manufacture and supply the “studio tension” with the contract amount of KRW 220,000,000,000, the place of delivery, the place of delivery, the place of payment, and the payment period of April 20, 2014 (hereinafter “instant mechanical supply contract”); and subsequently, on February 4, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to supply the electric equipment of KRW 33,00,000 to the said sloping machine (hereinafter “instant contract”) and paid KRW 16,50,000 as the contract deposit to the Plaintiff.

In the process, Nonparty G claimed that Nonparty G, while carrying out the design department of “E”, was brupt against Nonparty G, or was responsible for and could be manufactured for the performance machinery that Nonparty G wants.

The Defendants received the parts of the electric device from the Plaintiff and delivered it to the Nonparty Union around April 19, 2014 with the mechanical device, and installed it at the site around April 21, 2014, and continued to conduct a trial operation. However, the Defendants failed to meet the de facto performance due to the leakage of sludge and other trials, and continued to conduct a supplement and trial operation.

However, as the non-party union did not pass through a trial run continuously, on June 18, 2014, the non-party union returned it to the Defendants.

[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of a dispute, the Plaintiff manufactured and supplied the electric device according to the instant contract, which was alleged by the Plaintiff as to the entries and images of Gap 1 through 4, Eul 1, Eul 3 through 6, 9 through 11, and 14 (including the number of pages; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the entire pleadings. Although the non-party association failed to pass through the trial of the non-party association, it was not manufactured and supplied.

Even if this is not due to the defect of the electrical device, the defendant applies to the plaintiff.