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

The plaintiff is a legal entity whose purpose is manufacturing and wholesale and retail business, and the defendant is a merchant who engages in painting and waterproof construction wholesale business.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a goods supply agreement with the Defendant and supplied goods to the Defendant by July 1, 201, and issued a tax invoice claiming an outstanding amount of KRW 80,340,805 as of July 1, 201.

2. The plaintiff's claim and the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is liable to pay the above amount of KRW 80,340,805 to the plaintiff as the cause of the claim in this case. Accordingly, the defendant argues that the above claim for the price of goods was extinguished by the prescription.

B. Therefore, according to the above facts, the above claim for the price of goods constitutes the price for the goods sold by the merchant.

shall be extinguished by prescription in accordance with Article 163 (6) of the Civil Code, with the limit of the period of three years from the due date.

C.

However, on July 1, 2011, the due date for payment of the above product price claim is apparent in the plaintiff's assertion itself, and the facts that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case claiming the above product price was filed on January 19, 201 after the three-year period from the lawsuit of this case is obvious in records. Thus, barring special circumstances, the above product price claim expired by prescription, barring special circumstances.

D.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking the payment of the above goods return to the absence of reason, unless there are special circumstances to the contrary.

3. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s re-defense

A. As to this, the Plaintiff has a balance of KRW 80,340,805 that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff on October 31, 2011, as part of June 30, 2014.

“Preparation of a balance certificate to that effect.”