물품대금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On September 15, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an OEM manufacture contract with the Defendant, and concluded an incidental agreement with the Defendant that manufactures “product name C, size 80ml x 50 ml x 50 ml (hereinafter “instant product”) as requested by the Plaintiff and supplies the Plaintiff with KRW 15,000 per set.
On the other hand, the Plaintiff and the representative director entered into a contract with the Defendant on October 2014 that “product name: F, size 80ml x 30ml x 30ml (hereinafter “F products”) at the Plaintiff’s request and supply the products to the Plaintiff at KRW 11,100 per set.
The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of the remainder of KRW 13,872,560 for the supply price of the instant product by Hongsung District Court 2017Gaso780, Daejeon District Court 2017, and the judgment was rendered in favor of the Defendant on October 26, 2017. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed and continues the appeal court.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, and 6, entry of Eul evidence 3, 4, and 7, video of Gap evidence 9 and the purport of whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff asserts as follows.
The Plaintiff provided the Defendant with a 95% of the product mixing ratio of this case as the raw material of “the amiopia extraction amount”, the ampia, roots, and heat purchase, which are the raw material of “the ampia extraction amount”.
Accordingly, from September 23, 2014 to February 27, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with raw materials, such as accelerators, roots, and heat, and the amount reaches KRW 133,420,80.
However, the Defendant paid only 19,189,800 won of the supply price of the raw materials supplied by the Plaintiff on December 4, 2014 among the raw materials supplied by the Plaintiff for the household price, and did not pay the remainder of 114,231,00 won. Rather, the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the supply price of the goods of this case to the Daejeon District Court.