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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. The conclusion of the instant contract and the Plaintiff’s nonperformance 1) Plaintiff’s primary business is the production and sale of clothing, textile, etc. under the trade name “B.” The Defendant is a company aimed at importing and selling household goods, sports goods, clothing, etc. 2) and the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a written completion transaction contract with the intent to make and supply clothing at the Defendant’s request on May 22, 2013, and to pay the price to the Defendant. On the same day, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded an individual contract with the following day.

(4) When the delivery of the instant clothing was delayed, the Defendant visited the company that requested the manufacture of the instant clothing and visited KRW 18,92,520 on July 10, 2013, and paid KRW 5,148 in total, KRW 5,520, KRW 90, KRW 913 in color, KRW 3,423 in color, KRW 2,469 in color, and KRW 3,188 in color, among the instant clothing, the Plaintiff had to be on June 26, 2013. However, the Plaintiff supplied KRW 3,090 in color, KRW 3,09 in color, KRW 3,00 in color, KRW 18,992,520 in terms of the instant clothing.

5) On June 22, 2013, the Defendant planned to sell the instant clothing through the Home shopping, but the said broadcast was revoked due to the Plaintiff’s delay in its supply. The Defendant sold the instant clothing at KRW 59,000 at the rate of KRW 69,00,00, in the first-served broadcast sales in July 2013. At the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff was aware of the Defendant’s sale of the instant clothing through Home shopping. (b) The Defendant, around July 18, 2013, did not enter the Plaintiff and caused damage to KRW 204,25,090 due to the delay in storage, and thus, the Defendant was obligated to faithfully respond within seven days.