1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 4, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the production and installation of presses machinery (T/DPRES LINE) at the factory of the Defendant and China limited liability company (hereinafter “C”). Of the above contracts, the content of the instant case is as listed in attached Table 1.

B. In accordance with the above contract, the Defendant manufactured and installed a one-lane press machine around May 2010 at the workplace of C, and manufactured and installed eight-lane press machine on August 13, 201, and completed the trial operation from August 14, 2011 to the 17th day of the same month.

C. On July 5, 2012, D (K students; hereinafter “victim”) employed by the Defendant on the press machine installed on August 13, 2011 (hereinafter “instant press machine”), a worker of C was subjected to an accident that cut off four fingers on the right hand (e.g., stamp, stop, powder, possession) on the right hand (hereinafter “instant accident”).

The instant accident occurred due to the wind that 1/2 of the 1 administrative work, even though the press machine of this case must operate the safety 1 administrative work.

C On August 31, 2014, on the premise that the Defendant who manufactured and installed the press machinery of this case by paying the damages to the victims due to the instant accident, acquired the right to indemnity, C transferred the above claim for indemnity to the Plaintiff, notified the Defendant of the above assignment of claims on September 16, 2014, and the above notification reached the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, evidence 40, and evidence 42 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), witness F of the first instance trial, H's testimony, testimony of the first instance trial and the first instance trial witness E, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The gist of this safety defense C is that it constitutes a litigation trust, and thus, the Plaintiff is the assignee of the claim.