2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Upon Defendant B’s request, from April 2015 to October 17, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied D and E with goods equivalent to KRW 73,523,275, such as transportation units, street, network, etc.

When the Plaintiff urged the Defendant B to pay the price of goods, the Defendant B confirmed that the transaction of “(the Plaintiff’s) D and E” was integrated into D at the lower end of the account book (a fixed-term transaction report) presented by the Plaintiff: Provided, That the settlement of accounts is replaced by the supply of PP3600 (the system network is deemed to mean 3600) and affixed a seal on D’s name.

The Plaintiff was supplied from D with a system network of KRW 40,890,000 from November 4, 2015 to February 15, 2016.

D filed an application for corporate rehabilitation with the Daegu District Court 2016 Ma108. On June 29, 2016, the above court appointed Defendant B as a custodian when it rendered a decision to commence rehabilitation with respect to D on June 29, 2016. D reported rehabilitation claims to the above court and entered KRW 32,63,275 in the list of creditors.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a substantive party to a contract for the supply of goods related to the goods that the Plaintiff supplied to D and E, and Defendant C, as the representative of D’s factory site and E, has participated in the delivery of goods to D and E, and thus, is liable to pay the price for the goods.

Therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay 32,633,275 won and delay damages for the unpaid goods supplied by the plaintiff to D and E.

B. However, it is related to the goods that the Defendants supplied to D.