A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs the food manufacturing and processing business, etc., and the Defendant is a person engaged in the distribution business of food additives, etc. under the trade name of “C”.

B. From January 201 to October 7, 2014, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with goods (including value-added tax) equivalent to a total of KRW 60,793,200 (hereinafter “instant goods”). At the time of the supply of the instant goods, the Plaintiff prepared a trading list, and issued a tax invoice thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 60,793,200 for the unpaid goods and damages for delay at the rate of 6% per annum as stipulated by the Commercial Act from October 31, 2014 to December 12, 2014, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, which is the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment

B. On the part of the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts that the above tax invoice, the head of the sales office, and the head of the sales office, etc. are not trustable because each of the entries submitted by the plaintiff is inconsistent with those of the sales office, the

In full view of the purport of the entire argument in the above evidence, the head of the sales office shall provide the Plaintiff with the unit price of KRW 6,000, and the supply price of KRW 240,000, which was provided by the Plaintiff to the Defendant on February 18, 2013. On the other hand, the transaction statement prepared on the same day may acknowledge the fact that the unit price of sod leaf powder is KRW 9,00,000, and the supply price is KRW 360,000, and the supply price is 360,000. However, the following circumstances can be revealed by the purport of the entire evidence and arguments, namely, ① the transaction statement that the Plaintiff received by the Defendant on July 25, 2014.