A. The defendant is a company running the manufacturing business of industrial machinery in Kimhae-si C.

From October 2014 to January 2015, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for part of the Defendant’s quantity as a small president with the trade name D at the same place.

B. The defendant concluded a contract for the production and supply of a door-to-door from E, and the plaintiff manufactured the above goods at the defendant's factory and supplied them to E.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant have oral consultation with regard to the unit price of the goods to be delivered.

On the other hand, the defendant did not receive approximately KRW 22,330,000 (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) from E under the above contract for manufacturing and supply of goods.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3 through 6, Eul evidence 1 to 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. According to the Plaintiff’s principal claim and the Defendant’s goods contract, the amount of goods that the Defendant is liable to pay to the Plaintiff is KRW 34,545,500 in December 2014, and the amount of goods that the Defendant is liable to pay to the Plaintiff is KRW 34,545,500 in January 2015, and the Defendant does not pay KRW 14,500 in total and KRW 20,500 in remainder.

Here, if the Plaintiff deducts the consumption cost of KRW 2,940,00, and gas user fee of KRW 300,000, the Defendant pays KRW 16,805,50 to the Plaintiff, which is the principal claim.

B. The defendant's counterclaim claim is without merit.

The plaintiff's claim is justified.

Even if a defect occurred in goods produced by the Plaintiff and supplied to E, and the Defendant 80,000,000 won for the repair of the goods supplied to F, as well as 2,940,000 won for the repair of the goods that the Defendant repaired to E, the Defendant is KRW 2,920,000 for the repair of the defect in the additional document regarding the order to prepare for the name of June 8, 2016, and KRW 1,00,000 for the repair of the defect in F, and KRW 33,000 for the repair of the goods that the Defendant consulted with G regular business in E.