A. The Plaintiff operates “C” in the business of the branch industry, etc., and the Defendant operated “D”.

B. The Plaintiff supplied goods to the Defendant by January 17, 2014, and the amount of goods unpaid as of January 17, 2014 is KRW 49,801,800.

C. The Defendant’s price for goods to the Plaintiff on May 16, 2014 is KRW 20,000,000 on June 30, 2014, and the same year.

7. 30.10,000,000 won for the same year.

8. That payment shall be made in installments in 30.19,801,800 won;

‘The confirmation of the content is less than ‘the confirmation of this case'.

D. The Defendant paid KRW 9,700,000 to the Plaintiff on June 30, 2014. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 40,101,800 (=49,800,800-9,700,000) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Commercial Act from August 31, 2014, which is the day following the last payment date specified in the letter of confirmation of this case, to November 5, 2015, which is deemed reasonable for the Defendant to resist the existence and scope of the obligation.

The Plaintiff claimed damages for delay from January 18, 2014, but there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant lost the benefit of time due to the extension of the due date under the instant confirmation.

B. The Defendant’s assertion and judgment asserted that the Defendant assumed the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the goods on the grounds of exemption from liability. However, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the above company exempted the Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff consented thereto, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

3. Conclusion.