1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) USD 28,66.41 and its amount from May 12, 2015 to November 2016.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 2015, the Plaintiff (the original contractual party is C. C., and D Co. Ltd and the Plaintiff succeeded to the status of the party, and all rights and obligations relating to the substitute stone supply at issue in the instant case are currently the Plaintiff; hereinafter the Plaintiff referred to as “the Plaintiff”) decided to supply the substitute seats to the new E-construction site of the Union of Myanmar where the Defendant was awarded a contract for the human resources dispatch contract with the Defendant, and the specific consultation on the selection and supply of substitute seats was made with the F Co., Ltd. (F) that included the number of employees after concluding a contract for human resources dispatch with the Defendant.

Accordingly, on January 2015, G companies, who ordered the design sector during the E construction, visited G companies, G companies H, C President I (former Plaintiff’s representative), J directors belonging to the Defendant, F companies K president, and L directors, visiting China, which is the material supply site, and directly selected the substitute position for E construction.

B. On February 13, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant ($T-11, volume 1,18.80, volume 167, volume 167, volume 18.80, volume 186, 839.5, USD 186,839) and supplied substitute seats at the new site of E.

The main contents of the contract are as follows:

Article 4 (Scope of Construction Works) (1) All business affairs before customs clearance, including the provision of all documents to be prepared by the plaintiff for customs clearance, such as the supply of substitute stones, maritime transportation, sexual records, and origin verification according to the terms and conditions of the contract and the details thereof.

Provided, That the defective goods generated from the Dry-ray Insp Section at the site of the ordering place shall be handled by consultation between the plaintiff and the defendant.

C. On March 18, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a substitute supply contract with the Defendant with the following contents, and supplied substitute seats at the new site E.

Since then, according to the defendant's additional order, the plaintiff is the defendant.