A. On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) entrusted the Defendant with the processing of 10 punishment for original hair 100 from the Defendant; (b) supplied 9 punishment to the Defendant on November 22, 2016; (c) the Defendant did not pay KRW 3,680,200 to the Plaintiff; and (d) the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,50,000 to the Plaintiff as storage fees while keeping the remainder of original hairs after the process has been completed. Accordingly, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 5,180,200 and the delay damages therefor. (b) The amount of the consignment processing charges that the Defendant paid to the Defendant is limited to KRW 45,00 per punishment; and (b) the Plaintiff returned the amount of 9,400 punishment supplied by the Plaintiff.

(b) Determination 1) Each entry in Gap evidence 2 and Eul evidence 2 (including additional number);

For the purposes of this section, unless otherwise specified.

According to the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments, the Defendant’s request on November 1, 2016 to the Plaintiff for processing of 100 original hair 10 punishment, and the Plaintiff’s delivery of original hair 9 to the Plaintiff around November 22, 2016. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the processing price for original hair 9 punishment.

According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in subparagraphs B-2 and B-3, there is no evidence that the Defendant agreed to pay the same amount as the Plaintiff claimed by the Plaintiff as the processing cost, and according to the purport of the whole arguments and arguments in subparagraphs B-2 and C-3, only the fact that the Defendant agreed to KRW 45,000 per punishment as the processing cost at the time the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to provide the processing cost is recognized.

Meanwhile, according to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 10 and 11 as well as the entire arguments, it is recognized that the defendant returned to the plaintiff as the defendant had defects such as stuffing in Chapter 4 out of Chapter 9 of the original niversium supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant. Thus, it constitutes the above four punishment among the livers against the defendant of the plaintiff.