1. Of the instant lawsuit, Incheon District Court Branch Decision 2016 tea 1117 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From December 9, 2015 to February 17, 2016, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with the seeds equivalent to KRW 8,700,000 in total.

B. The Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 500,000,000 as the price for the above crops seeds, and KRW 2,100,000 as of December 14, 2015, respectively, and the Defendant discounted KRW 500,000 out of that price to the Plaintiff.

C. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff failed to pay KRW 5,600,000 (=8,700,000-500,000-2,100,000-50,000) out of the amount of seeds for agricultural crops, and that the Defendant received a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) from the Incheon District Court Branch Branching 2017, which sought payment of KRW 5,60,000 and damages for delay from February 18, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff asserts as follows.

1) Although the Plaintiff purchased the seeds bearing from the Defendant, the Defendant’s supply of the seeds to the Plaintiff was not the subject of the burden, but the Defendant’s production rate was not the subject of the charge, and the purpose of the contract could not be achieved. Therefore, the enforcement force of the instant payment order ought to be excluded. As such, the Defendant’s supply of the seeds to the Plaintiff, thereby causing loss of KRW 10,620,00 in total as agricultural materials, personnel expenses, and heating expenses, and KRW 14,380,00 in total as agricultural materials, personnel expenses, and heating expenses, and the Plaintiff’s supply of the seeds to the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obliged to compensate the Plaintiff for the total amount of damages of KRW 25,00,00 in total.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that he supplied the Plaintiff with the seeds at his own expense.

3. Whether a lawsuit filed against the Defendant regarding the part already collected is lawful

A. Ex officio, we examine the part concerning the termination of partial compulsory execution based on the instant payment order among the instant lawsuit.

(b).