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

A. From August 30, 2014 to January 31, 2015, the fact that the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with goods, such as acrylic company, etc., and the price for the goods that was not paid is 117,409,240 causes no dispute between the parties.

B. If so, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff 17,409,240 won for the price of the goods and damages for delay, unless there are special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defense

A. Since the Defendant, the representative director of the Defendant, agreed to accept the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff as a discharge of the Defendant’s obligation, the Defendant’s defense was insufficient to comply with the Plaintiff’s claim. Accordingly, according to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6, the Plaintiff and C (hereinafter “C, etc.”) as the representative director of the Defendant on March 13, 2015, entered into a mortgage agreement with the Plaintiff as to “the maximum claim amount of KRW 20 million, the obligor C, and the Plaintiff as the creditor and the mortgagee” (hereinafter “the instant real estate”). The Defendant’s mortgage agreement as to the instant real estate under the name of the Plaintiff, “the establishment of a mortgage is for the Defendant’s exemption of obligation against the Plaintiff as a discharge of obligation against the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiff as a discharge of obligation against the Plaintiff due to the completion of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage.”

Therefore, the defendant's defense is justified.

B. As to this, the Plaintiff concluded the instant mortgage contract with C, etc. with the employee delegated by the representative director of the Plaintiff.