The defendant's KRW 50.6 million and its KRW 32.190,000 among the plaintiff's KRW 50.6 million and KRW 18.410,00 from September 6, 2019.

The plaintiff alleged by the parties is an individual entrepreneur who manufactures special tools, etc. under the trade name of "C", and the defendant is a legal entity that manufactures joint-rating equipment and fuel cell separation plates.

In this case, the plaintiff and the defendant set up a supply contract with regard to the exclusive use of the machinery installed on the machinery for the purpose of manufacturing the defendant's fuel cell separation plate (the machinery is composed of a string machine for the purpose of this body and product processing) and the exclusive use machinery (the above machinery is manufactured and supplied to D) and the defendant requested the manufacture and supply of the machinery for the purpose of crime use and the exclusive use of the machinery. In other words, the defendant requested the manufacture of the machinery for the exclusive use of D due to the increase in the defective rate of products manufactured, the increase in the cost of production due to frequent change of the machinery, etc., and the plaintiff requested the manufacture of the machinery for the exclusive use of the machinery, and the exclusive use of the machinery installed is supplied by the plaintiff, but the defendant refused to receive it, and sought the payment for dispute and the exclusive use of the machinery produced by the plaintiff.

On the other hand, the defendant is arguing that ① the plaintiff's conclusion of the supply contract as to the dispute for the exclusive use, ② there is a defect in the first order items already supplied by the plaintiff prior to the order items (the second order items) that the plaintiff seeks in this case, and the defect is not repaired and thus the contract for the exclusive use is cancelled, so there is no reason to respond to the plaintiff's claim.

The gist of the parties’ assertion is detailed in the record of the preparation date of the oral argument on March 17, 2020. The judgment on the so-called “compact for crime” claim - The judgment on the “compact for crime” claim - The first claimant for the plaintiff’s first claimant was examined in order to examine whether the contract on “compact for crime” is established.

Although there is a difference between the time and the content of the contract, the plaintiff and the defendant have a total of 3,8650,000 won (a value added tax is separate, this is the case.) over two times until December 2017.