Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 102,282,601, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from July 27, 2017 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order.

2. The defendant's assertion asserts that the amount equivalent to the above claim should be deducted from the amount of non-payment because the defendant's claim for the price of the goods equivalent to KRW 61.9 million against the third party is transferred to the plaintiff for the repayment of the price of the goods.

According to the evidence evidence Nos. 3 and 4, around January 16, 2017, the defendant entered into a contract on the transfer of the goods price claim amounting to KRW 61.9 million held by the defendant to the plaintiff. However, barring special circumstances, the transfer of the obligation to the creditor in relation to the repayment of the obligation to the creditor is presumed to have been transferred by means of a security or repayment for the repayment of the obligation, and it is not deemed to substitute for the repayment of the obligation. In such case, the transfer of the obligation cannot be deemed to have immediately terminated if the obligation is transferred to the creditor, and the obligor shall be exempted from the obligation within the scope of the obligation when the creditor received the repayment of the assigned obligation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da1660, Dec. 22, 1995). According to the evidence Nos. 4, the plaintiff and the defendant can be acknowledged that the obligation is extinguished only when the creditor demanded the satisfaction of the claim to the amount of the company.