물품대금
1. The Defendant’s KRW 18,528,00 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 6% per annum from January 1, 2013 to August 19, 2016, and the following.
A. The instant lawsuit constitutes a peremptory notice. It is apparent in the record that the instant lawsuit was filed on April 30, 2014, which was within six months from November 15, 2013, and thus, the extinctive prescription of the claim for the price of goods due to the supply of goods was completed on November 15, 2010, when three years have elapsed since it was retroactively calculated from November 15, 2013.
Therefore, we examine the specific scope of claims for the payment of goods after November 16, 2010 among the plaintiff's claims by considering the following unit prices, quantities, etc.
2) The part on which the Defendant asserted the unit price claim is as follows: from April 2009 to November 16, 2010 of the unit price agreed with the Plaintiff during the period from November 201, 209 to the completion of transaction;
According to the detailed description size (cost) 1200*800 70,000 5,000 5,000 80,000 160,000 " " 1800,000 1800 180,000 4,000 4,000 20,000 3-69,000 5,000 5,000 5,00 3-6 906 90,00 80 80 80,00 0 70 20 80 50 20 20 5 70 1,00 70 70 20 5 20 20 3 5 200 20 20 3 5 700 202 20 20 3 201 70 200 2 20 3 200 2 1 2
In addition, there is no dispute between the parties as to the unit price of 150,000 won for the five short period of glass, and in the case of table table and auxiliary table table, it does not seem that the plaintiff supplied goods that meet the unit price and specifications claimed by the defendant.
2. 3 Maderns on January 22, 2011: Supply volume, 3/3/5 on May 18, 2011; or
5. 19. Quantities 2/D. 19. Quantities 19. The Plaintiff shall be entitled to supply on April 19, 2012; 4/7. 20 on July 20, 2012; 1/30 on July 30, 2012; and 1 in volume.