1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On October 20, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a basic supply contract with the Defendant on the basis of goods supply, and entered into separate agreements on quality assurance and compensation standards for CLAI (CLAI). (2) According to Article 8 of the above contract, the Plaintiff stipulates that “the pass of goods supplied to the Defendant and the decision of failure shall comply with the Rules on Inspection and Testing Business of the Defendant. The Defendant is not responsible for the separate transfer of the goods supplied by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff is liable for the supply of the goods that the Plaintiff passed 10%.” According to Article 6 of the Written Compensation Agreement, “the Plaintiff must take charge of the Plaintiff’s expenses and liability within 10 days from the date of receipt of notice from the Defendant on the claim for CLM, and the Defendant may arbitrarily deal with the goods after the lapse of this period.”

B. 1) Pursuant to the above contract, the Plaintiff: (a) from November 201 to May 31, 2012, 201, the studioglass (GT-S5830, NX-200, KP-400, hereinafter “instant goods”) that are mobile phone parts to the Defendant.

2) The Plaintiff supplied the instant goods (hereinafter “the instant goods transaction”).

(2) If the Plaintiff supplied the instant goods to the Defendant, the instant transaction was conducted by the Plaintiff in a manner of recovering the defective goods upon the Defendant’s inspection and upon the Plaintiff’s request.

3) In addition, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with Goragle (0.7T), which is a private supply material, among the materials necessary for the manufacture of the instant goods, and subsequently settled the price of the instant goods in a way of offsetting the price of the goods that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff. The purport of the entirety of the arguments by the Defendant is as follows: (a) the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition; (b) the entries in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4-1 through 3; and (c) the statements in the evidence

2. Determination on the main claim

A. As to the claim for the price of goods, the Plaintiff’s judgment on the claim for the price of goods is equivalent to KRW 12,160,000 supplied by the Plaintiff.