1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who manufactures and sells in the trade name of “D”, and Defendant C is a person who engages in the intra-competitive wholesale business in the trade name of “E” under the name of “E”.

B. The Plaintiff supplied an oral test to the Defendant from May 2012 to February 2013, 2013. The Defendant did not pay KRW 29,190,100 out of the amount of goods.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid amount of KRW 29,190,100 and delay damages therefor, unless there are special circumstances.

3. The defendant's argument concerning the defendant's assertion argues that since the defendant suffered damage equivalent to KRW 40 million due to the occurrence of a defect in part of the safe test supplied by the plaintiff, the defendant's deduction from the unpaid price of the goods would not remain the price of the goods to be paid to the plaintiff. Accordingly, the plaintiff asserts that the amount of damage caused by the defect in the safe test is only five million won.

It is insufficient to recognize that the respective descriptions and images of Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including the number of branch numbers) have caused damages exceeding the above 5 million won recognized by the plaintiff due to any defect in the save test, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant is at the rate of 24,190,100 won (=29,190,100 won - 5,000,000 won) which is calculated by deducting the amount of damages arising from the above defect from the price of the goods unpaid to the plaintiff and at the rate of 6% per annum as stipulated in the Commercial Act from February 11, 2014, which is the day following the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case until October 31, 2014, which is deemed reasonable for the defendant to dispute about the existence or scope of the obligation, and 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment.