1. From May 201 to the Defendant, the Plaintiff appears to be a sporesporesponding “spores” in which the source (mainly synthetic fibres, synthetic fibres, cotton, or hairs) is combined with the Defendant. Of them, it appears that the source made by the rewing method of sporespores, among them, is divided into a sporesporesponding part for convenience. Moreover, it appears that other sporesporesporesporesponding from polyspores and polysporesporesporesporesponding to include a sporesporesporesporesponding sporesporesponding sporesporesporesporesporesporesponding from the Defendant’s trade, and the Defendant seems to have been engaged in sporesporesporesporespores to have been supplied to the Plaintiff as well as the final products to have been produced from each sporesporesporesthing or sporesporespores.

[Ground of recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. The fact of recognition 1) The Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with a total of KRW 3,99,00 from July 11, 2013 to January 24, 2014 according to the above contract. The amount of the goods that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay is KRW 72,485,710 in total (which is grounds for recognition: stated in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings). According to the above fact of recognition, the Defendant is the amount of the goods that the Defendant had already received to the Defendant out of the said goods.