1. The Defendant paid KRW 54,087,00 to the Plaintiff KRW 20% per annum from June 2, 2015 to September 30, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 10, 2012, the Plaintiff is “the instant machinery” which is a building facility that dypates the basin from the Defendant using the original external line, and is “the original equipment to dry the basin,” which is “the equipment to build low temperature drying equipment and ancillary equipment.”

54,087,00 Won 54,00 (hereinafter referred to as "the sales contract of this case") is called as "the sales contract of this case".

B) The Defendant concluded a sales contract. B. The Defendant sold the instant machinery to the Plaintiff, while using the instant machinery for the purpose of building a stowing and re-afusing it. (c) On January 2013, the Plaintiff was supplied with the instant machinery and carried out trial operation from February 1, 2013 to April 1, 2013, and paid all remainders pursuant to the sales contract to the Defendant on April 1, 2013. D. Unlike the Defendant’s publicity details, the Plaintiff did not properly build a stowing and re-af, and notified the Defendant of the cancellation of the sales contract and the demand for the return of the purchase price. [The purport of the entire pleadings, as seen earlier, are as follows: (a) the Plaintiff was not a large amount of electric consumption of the instant machinery; (b) the construction of the stowing and re-af, and (c) the internal body part of the dried machine was melted in the test operation status.

2. Determination

A. According to the appraiser B’s appraisal results and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that, in light of the characteristics, etc. of the original out-of-the-way system applied to the instant machine, it is inappropriate for the appraiser B to build the aesthetic field. The drying room of the instant machine is found that, when the air exhauster was operated, it was below the set temperature even if the air exhauster was not put into the station, and that, when the air exhauster was put into the station, it is difficult to properly build the aesthetic field which has been put into the station.

Therefore, the defendant's delivery of defective machinery of this case to the plaintiff cannot be deemed to be a complete performance under the sales contract, and thus, the defendant's default is recognized, and the plaintiff's declaration of intent is stated that the sales contract of this case will be terminated on the