A. The Plaintiffs are companies engaged in the trade business of fishery products, etc., and the Defendant is a person who runs the trade name processing business, etc. under the trade name of “B” in Gangwon-do.

B. On January 1, 2015, the Defendant directly contacted C with the employees of Busan Coastal Fishery Products Market Co., Ltd. in charge of the business related to the auction of fishery products.

Since then, C requested the plaintiffs to supply freezing 2,400 boxes for yellow Tae as "D" located in the Gosung-gun of Gangwon-do designated by the defendant.

C. On January 5, 2015, Plaintiff East Sea Trade Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff East Sea Trade”) supplied an amount equivalent to KRW 1,200,60,000 for Free Trade Zone 48,60,000 for Free Trade Zone 1,200, and Plaintiff passenger fishery Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff passenger fishery”) supplied an amount equivalent to KRW 1,200 for Free Trade Zone 48,60,000 for Free Trade Zone 48,60,000 for Free Trade Zone 1,200 for Free Trade Zone 21, 2015.

(hereinafter above, each of the above freezing addresses is referred to as "the freezing of this case"

D At the Defendant’s request, she provided the Defendant with freezing and washing the freezing of this case, and the Defendant created and used it as a yellow attitude.

[Ground of recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including the number of each unit; hereinafter the same shall apply), the testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiffs supplied each of the instant freezing 1,200 boxes to the Defendant as ordered by the Defendant.

The defendant, who is a party to the contract, is obligated to pay the plaintiff's goods price of KRW 48,60,000 to the trade in the East Sea, and the plaintiff's passenger fishery with KRW 48,60,000 to the plaintiff's passenger fishery with KRW 935,00 in total, and each of them shall be liable to pay KRW 49,535,00 in total, and delay damages.

B. The Defendant was supplied with a freezing scambling from Defendant E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and the goods were supplied with the freezing scambling as a substitute for the defective goods.