A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a steel credit transaction agreement on February 3, 2016, and accordingly, the Plaintiff supplied steel of KRW 25,147,760 to the Defendant on April 27, 2016, and the Defendant returned to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 7,659,300, out of the amount of goods sold on October 4, 2016.

B. Therefore, barring any other circumstances, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the goods price of KRW 8,488,460 (25,147,760 - 7,659,300 - 9,000,000) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 19, 2016 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served after the due date for the payment of the goods.

2. The defendant's assertion argues that the plaintiff's claim cannot be complied with because the plaintiff suffered losses, such as the plaintiff's failure to timely deliver the defective iron plates to the business partner and the loss of the business partner without receiving the payment.

However, there is no evidence to prove that the fact that the plaintiff deducted the price for the defective steel plates from the claim amount, and that there is no evidence to prove that the defendant suffered a significant loss.

Therefore, the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.