1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff requested the Defendant to manufacture and supply female strings, and accordingly, the Defendant manufactured female strings (hereinafter “instant machinery”) and installed the instant machinery at the Plaintiff’s workplace around February 25, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

On February 28, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 17,859,00,00 to the Defendant, including the cost of goods consumed in the instant machinery amounting to KRW 12.5 million.

C. Since then, the Plaintiff was at issue of the defect of the instant machine, and the Defendant demanded return of the instant machine to the Defendant, and around May 2013, the Defendant brought the instant machine in the Plaintiff’s workplace.

The instant machinery is currently kept by C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff requested repair to the Defendant on the grounds that the parts necessary for the operation of the instant machinery were damaged, etc., but it was not proper to repair, and thus, it was required to return the instant machinery to the Defendant on or around May 2013. Accordingly, the Defendant agreed to recover the instant machinery and return KRW 12.5 million to the Defendant until December 2013, and the Defendant rescinded the instant contract. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the Plaintiff the price of the instant machinery and the delay damages therefrom. (2) Although the Defendant claimed by the Plaintiff requested the return of the instant machinery, the Defendant did not comply with the request, the Plaintiff purchased the same kind of machinery as the instant machinery, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant merely traded it between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Defendant did not recover the instant machinery.

The Plaintiff and C agreed to determine whether to purchase the instant machinery after using C for three days, and they agreed to do so.