2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendants.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. On April 1, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for supply of goods with Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) with the content that the Plaintiff would supply the cosmetics and beauty art products manufactured by the Plaintiff to the Defendant Company, and that the Defendant would pay the price (hereinafter “instant supply contract”), and agreed to pay the price in US currency (US$).

B. According to the above contract, the Plaintiff supplied the goods to the Defendant, and the amount unpaid by the Defendant Company reaches USD 96,745.31 in total.

C. The Defendant Company prepared a letter of commitment to pay USD 96,745.31 to the Plaintiff on November 28, 2016 and delivered it to the Plaintiff by December 12, 2016.

However, the Defendant Company failed to comply with the aforementioned payment commitment, and the Defendant Company paid USD 96,745.31 on March 30, 2017 the unpaid amount of USD 96,745.31 until April 20, 2017, and the Defendant C prepared a written confirmation of the payment of goods with the content of joint and several liability (hereinafter “instant confirmation”).

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay USD 96,745.31 to the plaintiff the amount of goods payable and delay damages.

B. As to this, the Defendants did not agree with the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the supply of individual goods. Nevertheless, the instant confirmation document was prepared by the Defendants, once signed by the Defendants, to accept or adjust the amount of inventory return. ② The instant supply contract was drafted by the Plaintiff’s pressure, and constitutes a compulsory purchase by unfairly taking advantage of the Plaintiff’s transactional position. ③ The Plaintiff deceivings the Plaintiff regarding the Plaintiff’s experience in the supply of goods at his foreign duty-free shops and the foreign market trend.