1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion - The Plaintiff was a company that manufactures and sells heat cohesion systems (hereinafter “instant cohesion systems”) from 2012 to 2017, and has been supplied with PE pumps (Ss 40-10T/L, etc.) from the Defendant.

- The plaintiff has made half-finished products after having a aluminium heading on the PE pumps through various processes and made finished products after having a variety of processes.

The completed short heat system has the form of unfolding the original body in the shape of the water network through the sex work.

- The PE 10.5T pumps supplied by the Defendant on July 19, 2016 (hereinafter “the original part of this case”) had difference between the original part of the flat and the material of the flat, and the Plaintiff was from July 19, 2016.

7. Until December 21, 200, it was found that the original unit of this case was manufactured, but the original unit was not found or cut.

- The Plaintiff discarded all the above defective goods, and as indicated in the attached Table, the Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 1.65,50,000,000 for waste disposal costs as well as material costs (the value of raw materials put into various processes until the manufacturing process of the defective goods) incurred in manufacturing the defective goods, including KRW 30,776,460 for total sum of KRW 32,426,460.

- The defendant is entitled to pay the above damages.

2. Determination:

A. ① From July 19, 2016, prepared by the Plaintiff

7. The daily production daily report and on-site work log (Evidence A7 to 9) contain the following: (a) the phrase "the change of working conditions, such as the temperature, etc. of the other machine due to the occurrence of the removal of the PE10.5T pumps" in the daily production log and on-site work log (Evidence A7 to 9); and (b) the defect treatment report (Evidence A5) prepared by the Plaintiff's employee C entered the PE10.5T pumps in the course of the arrival of semi-finished products differently from the material of the normal level; (c) the person in charge of the Defendant Company directly visited the Plaintiff Company and reported it to the Plaintiff Company by the vice head; and (d) even through the record of the contents of the currency content (Evidence A17) of the above C and D, D are defective products.