1. The goods supply contract between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) on February 28, 2012 is based on each of the first half of the white year.

1. Basic facts

A. In early 2011, Newanan-gun promoted the so-called “the so-called “the business of this case” aimed at producing functional lux by adding the first ten-year composition to the lux feed and fostering it as a local specific product (hereinafter “the business of this case”), and publicly announced a support plan with a subsidy of 80% of the project cost to the relevant business operator.

Meanwhile, on the other hand, the Plaintiff was a juristic person established around January 2010 by Shin-gun for the purpose of processing, exporting, producing, distributing, selling, etc. of Do block, and was selected as a business entity in March 7, 201 of the instant project from Newanan-gun, which submitted a business plan to the effect that he/she will produce salt treatment of Do block in form and produce an annual-end mixed feed with the effect of preventing diseases.

B. Around May 2, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to be supplied with a total of KRW 300 million for the first half of the year from the said Company (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) in order to carry out the instant business.

In accordance with the above contract, until June 30, 201, the non-party company supplied the Plaintiff with the first half of 100 million won, and around February 2012, D, a creditor of the non-party company, supplied the first half of 200 million won to the Plaintiff, and around February 2012, D, a creditor of the non-party company, failed to timely supply the second half of 200 million won as the wind to apply for an auction with respect to the raw materials of

Accordingly, the Plaintiff urged the non-party company to supply multiple times on March 26, 2012, and notified the non-party company of its intention to terminate the supply contract at the beginning of the above white year, and then attempted to make a compromise thereafter. On April 5, 2012, the Plaintiff and the non-party company agreed to postpone the delivery period at the end of the white year to April 19, 2012 under the witness of the public official E in charge of maritime affairs and fisheries with the New Military Administration (hereinafter “instant consultation”).

However, the first half of the year is owned by the non-party company.