A. The Plaintiff is operating a pesticide sales store with the trade name “D” in the Gangseo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

B. In 2016, the Defendant cultivated drillings in Gangwon-gun E and in Gangwon-si F department. From May 25, 2016 to August 7, 2016, the Plaintiff purchased pesticides, such as killing insects, from the Plaintiff, and the unpaid pesticide price is KRW 38,109,600.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, entry of Gap 1, 2, and 7 (including virtual numbers), witness G testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts found in the judgment on the principal claim, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid pesticide price of KRW 38,109,600 and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from June 24, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the day when the application for the instant payment order was served to the Defendant.

3. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. Around July 2016, the gist of the Defendant’s assertion: (a) there was a brupt in the dry field located in the Republic of Korea F in the above Gangseo-si; (b) upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff mobilized the figures, and spread insects and auxiliary agents to the dry field at the end of July of the same year and around August of the same year on two occasions; (c) the Plaintiff’s negligence in the preparation of the drug or the man’s negligence that led to the Plaintiff’s negligence that led to the spread of the insect field, which led to the aggravation of the insects.

The Defendant entered into an advance sale contract with H Co., Ltd., and the aforementioned F PP as KRW 250,000,000, with respect to the distribution of fish plantations cultivated in H Co., Ltd., the Defendant received only KRW 180,000,000 due to the disease and insect pests that occurred as above.

Therefore, the Plaintiff should compensate the Defendant for damages equivalent to KRW 70,00,000 ( KRW 250,000,000 - KRW 180,000,000) incurred due to the Plaintiff’s negligence.

B. The Plaintiff, on August 2016, did not have any dispute between the parties to a dispute regarding the fact that the Plaintiff mobilized the parts of the Defendant’s culture field located in the instant FF that was cultivated by the Defendant and scattered agricultural chemicals.

(b).