1. The Plaintiff’s obligation based on the supply certificate concluded on January 5, 2016 for the Defendant does not exist.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a person who operates a solar power plant under the trade name of “C” after obtaining permission for the electricity generation business pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Electric Utility Act. The Plaintiff is the new and renewable energy development promotion law (hereinafter “new and renewable energy law”).

) As a supplier of energy using new and renewable energy pursuant to Article 12-7, a supply certificate is called “supply certificate” or “REC” from the supply certification body.

(2) The Defendant is obligated to supply at least a certain amount of power generation using new and renewable energy pursuant to Article 12-5 of the New and Renewable Energy Act, as a company engaged in the development and development of electric resources and projects related thereto, and may appropriate the amount of mandatory supply by purchasing a new and renewable energy supply certificate issued by the supply certification institution.

3) Supply certificates are established in accordance with Article 12-9(2) of the New and Renewable Energy Act and guidelines for the management and operation of the mandatory supply system of new and renewable energy publicly notified by the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy (hereinafter “Rules on the Operation of the Trading Market”).

(2) The Plaintiff, on January 5, 2016, prepared a supply certificate issued by the Plaintiff and the Defendant on January 5, 2016, shall be traded in the transaction market established by the supply certification institution in accordance with the terms of the contract (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”). The Plaintiff, on January 5, 2016, agreed to sell the supply certificate issued by the Plaintiff to the Defendant upon setting the 12-year contract period, contractual unit price of KRW 70,000/

A) The Plaintiff drafted a contract bond of KRW 1,201,00 to the Defendant, as stipulated in the instant sales contract. The Plaintiff paid the contract bond of KRW 1,201,00 to the Defendant as a guaranty insurance policy (the fact that there is no dispute over recognition, evidence No. 1

2. Determination as to a claim for non-existence of a contract

(a) the establishment of a sales contract;