1. The Defendant’s KRW 104,343,943 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual 5% from April 29, 2017 to April 17, 2018, and the following.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with the Defendant (347 punishment for the supplied quantity, 350,030 won per punishment for the supplied price). According to the work instruction written by the Defendant, the Plaintiff supplied the above product and received the payment in full from D Co., Ltd. on August of the same year. The original part is supplied by D Co., Ltd.

B. The Defendant received clocks (2 cases) from some customers that the clocks of the Plaintiff, while selling the clocks after being supplied by the Plaintiff.

C. At around April 2016, the Plaintiff informed D Co., Ltd. that it was received from the Defendant due to the phenomenon that it became known to D Co., Ltd. and demanded to take measures against it.

D Co., Ltd., due to the characteristics of Alphamaa, became aware of the Plaintiff, and following the E-Research Institute's Mali attachment test, the E-Research Institute respondeded that the level 4, which is the standard for quality assurance of textile products.

On the other hand, on July 20, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Korea Consumer Agency on July 20, 2016, and the F Research Institute on August 5, 2017 to conduct an examination on the above original body, and the result was insufficient in Grade 4, which is the standard for quality assurance of textile products.

E. On August 17, 2016, the Defendant expressed his intent to return to the Plaintiff the entire quantity of 271 punishment (including value added tax, KRW 104,343,943) in the remaining stock quantity after selling it to the Plaintiff as a measure following the occurrence of alpha’s failure to take place.

F. Accordingly, on October 2016, the Plaintiff receives and keeps the entire remaining stock quantity of the Defendant’s product labelling, etc. in a state where the product labelling, etc. is removed.

G. The Defendant paid 104,343,943 won out of the supply price of spring goods in 2017 supplied by the Plaintiff on the ground that it was above click. The Defendant did not pay 122,697,850 won.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 7, described in Eul 1 through 11, witness G testimony, purport of whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant shall be unpaid to the plaintiff.