1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay KRW 3,986,100 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its full payment from April 25, 2014.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence No. 1 as to the claim of this lawsuit, the plaintiff is liable to pay to the defendant the amount of goods 3,986,100 won from July 22, 2013 to August 31, 2013. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount of goods 3,986,100 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. from April 25, 2014 to the day of complete payment, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff.

The defendant asserts that the price of the goods can not be paid because there is a defect in the goods supplied by the plaintiff, but the above argument is without merit as examined in paragraph (2) below.

2. Judgment on a counterclaim

A. Among the goods supplied by the Defendant asserted by the Defendant, the 1.5t Rool (500m x 500m x 300m x 300m m m ; hereinafter “instant waterproof box”) should be created as a ice lease. Since cryp and reading centers, etc. are not a ice lease, defects occurred, and the costs of KRW 38,575,00 were incurred for new construction due to the said defects. Accordingly, the Defendant’s claim for damages amounting to KRW 77,150,000, which is twice the said construction costs.

B. First of all, the facts that part of the waterproof box of this case was not created as a stheme lease are defective, and there was no dispute between the parties as to whether part of the waterproof box of this case was not created as a stheme lease material, but in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff requested six supply of the s the sthemeproof box from the Defendant, and supplied one of which (unit price 283,000 won) to the Defendant as a sampling around July 13, 2013, and five additional supply was made from the Defendant as well as the same material as the quality of the waterproof box of this case on July 22, 2013.