As to this, the defendant asserts that among the above goods price, the confession is against the truth and is due to mistake, since he made a confession without knowing the fact that the costs of transportation, which the plaintiff had to bear, were included due to the change in transportation method, as set forth in Section 2-B (1) below.

However, in light of the circumstances examined in Section 2(b)(2) below, the evidence alone presented by the Defendant alone contradicts the truth.

Since it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant was due to a mistake or mistake, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 34,942,479 won for goods and delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from July 29, 2017 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. (1) The summary of the Defendant’s assertion and the Defendant set the payment period as follows at the end of 2012 and early transaction in 2013.

The first delivery date: Total delivery date of 8,276 sufficient on December 30, 2012: Total delivery date of 56,754 sufficient on January 10, 2013: the third delivery date of the third delivery date of 56,754 sufficient on January 10, 2013: the Defendant, which was supplied by the Plaintiff, manufactured a b1,480 squareized from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff Company D (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and supplied KRW 20,000 per unit to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s delay in the payment period, the Nonparty Company refused to be supplied with a 67,508 sufficient quantity from the Defendant.

As above, the defendant supplied the non-party company with the volume of delayed delivery at around December 2013, and around February 2014 from the non-party company.