In accordance with the instant contract, the Plaintiff supplied the product to the Defendant, and the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff money equivalent to 6,170,428N in Japan out of the payment until November 30, 201, the last payment deadline for the product price.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 3, 4, 5, 20 through 28, each entry, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from December 1, 2011 to March 20, 2014, which was served on the Plaintiff’s written brief from March 20, 2014, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment.

In response, the defendant defenses to the effect that the plaintiff suffered damages against the defendant in violation of the contract of this case, and thus offset the plaintiff's claim for the price of the goods with the defendant's claim for damages. However, in light of each of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9-1, 2, and 10-1, 2, 3, 11 through 19-1, 2, 2, 29, and 30-1, 10-1, 2, 2, 29, 4, and 9-1, 10-1, 2, 2, 30-1, 2, and 30-2, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the plaintiff violated the contract of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise, the defendant's defense based on the premise that the defendant had the claim for damages against the plaintiff due to the breach of contract cannot be accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.