1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 18,828,136 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 3, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

1. The Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with goods equivalent to KRW 21,328,136 from October 19, 2015 to January 4, 2016. The fact that the Defendant paid KRW 2.5 million out of the above goods and the Defendant still paid the goods amounting to KRW 18,828,136 remains is no dispute between the parties.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 18,828,136 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from June 3, 2016 to the date of full payment after the copy of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant.

2. The defendant's argument as to the defendant's assertion argues that the plaintiff's filing of the claim of this case in violation of the above promise is contrary to the principle of trust and good faith, although the defendant promised to claim the price after three months after supplying the goods at the time of the transaction

However, even if there is a promise alleged by the Defendant, the present time is three months after the Plaintiff supplied the goods.

In addition, damages for delay claimed by the plaintiff are also claimed from the point of time three months after the goods were supplied, so the defendant's argument does not constitute the reason for refusing the plaintiff's claim.

In addition, even if the defendant assumes that there was a promise alleged by the defendant, and the plaintiff's promise was accepted, the principle of trust and good faith is exceptionally accepted in cases where it is judged that there is an unafforable situation in light of the concept of justice, and it is difficult to view the plaintiff's claim of this case as contrary to

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is accepted on the grounds of its reasoning.