A. The Plaintiff is a company that develops, manufactures, and sells ESD lighting, and the Defendant is a person who manufactures and sells lighting fixtures, etc. in the trade name of “B”.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to supply the LED lighting fixtures to the Defendant, which are to be established by the Defendant at each national agency store in the age, the sports supplies company, and the NA lighting fixtures established by the Defendant. The Plaintiff continued to supply the goods to the Defendant from September 201 to April 2016.

C. During the aforementioned transaction period, the supply price on the tax invoice issued by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff as the Defendant is KRW 3,162,949,90 (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply). The Defendant paid the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 2,502,860,882 from October 5, 201 to April 12, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (if there are provisional numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. Plaintiff 1) The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the total amount of goods that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff (the amount calculated by deducting KRW 181,609,218 from the supply price on the tax invoice issued by the Plaintiff) at KRW 2,981,340,682 (the supply price on the tax invoice issued by the Plaintiff plus KRW 3,162,949,90), or at KRW 2,502,860,882 from among the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff was paid only KRW 478,479,80 (the amount of KRW 2,981,340,682 - 2,502,860,882) and damages for delay. The Defendant has continuously and repeatedly paid the outstanding amount to the Plaintiff at KRW 3,162,99,90,000 from the purchase price on the goods supplied by the Defendant in the order of statutory appropriation for payment. Thus, the unpaid amount is ultimately appropriated to the Plaintiff under Article 16361360.