1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is located in C in terms of harmony with the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) regarding the attached list 1 equipment.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 2, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the manufacture and supply of the equipment listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant equipment”) with the Defendant, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 108,900,000 (including value-added tax) to the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to deliver the completed equipment to the Plaintiff within 60 days after entering into the contract.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

Under the instant contract, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the remainder of KRW 10,890,000 in the intermediate payment of KRW 32,670,000 on March 10, 2017, and KRW 65,340,00 on May 25, 2017, and KRW 10,890,00 on August 31, 2017. The Defendant supplied the instant equipment to the Plaintiff around April 18, 2017.

C. On October 20, 2017, while the Plaintiff was operating the instant equipment on October 20, 2017, two Vs (M8 KVs) used to combine the equipment with the equipment tynasar (Tie Bar) were simultaneously destroyed, and there was an accident where the instant equipment is 5 to 10 degrees, along with a very large wave.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.

On October 20, 2017, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to repair the instant equipment, and the Defendant sent the Plaintiff the instant amendment on October 30, 2017, following the Plaintiff’s meeting as of October 30, 2017, the first amendment on November 1, 2017, and the second amendment on November 6, 2017.

On November 6, 2017, the Plaintiff requested the Plaintiff to verify the instant equipment after installing the Plaintiff’s factory, and to revise the instant equipment in Tiear in a way that she does not cut off. The Defendant asserted that the instant equipment should be installed in the Plaintiff factory after verifying the Defendant’s factory, and responded to the purport that it is impossible to revise the said equipment because it is a single set of still existing in the previous amendment.

E. The Defendant is under custody of the instant equipment after completing repair in accordance with the second amendment around November 17, 2017.

F. On April 10, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of his/her intent to rescind the instant contract by means of content-certified mail and returned the amount of goods and interest thereon by April 30, 2018.