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

On April 5, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the sale of goods with the content that the Plaintiff supplied the Switzerland file to the Defendant for a price of KRW 480 million. On November 2010, the Plaintiff refused to pay the said goods when the defect was discovered. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 270 million as the price for each of the goods.

Therefore, the defendant should pay 270 million won to the plaintiff as the price for each of the above goods.

2. In light of the judgment, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant agreed to pay 270 million won to the plaintiff as the price for each of the above goods, and the defendant asserts that each of the above goods-price claim asserted by the plaintiff expired by the prescription. The above goods-price claim constitutes the price for the goods sold by the merchant and its extinctive prescription is three years pursuant to Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act. The fact that each of the above goods-price claim falls under the price for the goods sold by the merchant. The fact that the payment period for each of the above goods is around November 2010 is no dispute between the parties, and it is apparent that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case was filed on May 15, 2015 after three years from the lawsuit of this case. Thus, each of the above goods-price claim was extinguished by the prescription

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it appears to be a mother or there is no reason to do so, and it is so decided as per Disposition.