1. Defendant B’s KRW 55,043,505 as well as 6% per annum from February 13, 2015 to November 18, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who has a place of business in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, and engages in textile manufacturing and wholesale business. Defendant B is an individual entrepreneur who has a place of business in Seo-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, and engages in clothes manufacturing and wholesale business. Defendant C is an individual entrepreneur who has a place of business in Incheon-gu I and 503, and mainly engages in trade agency business between Korea and China.

B. On February 10, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied the original unit to Defendant C’s export warehouse designated by Defendant B upon receipt of a request from Defendant B to supply the original unit (hereinafter “instant original unit”). Defendant C exported part of the original unit of this case to the processing company located in China on February 11, 2015.

C. After completing the supply of the instant headquarters on February 12, 2015, the Plaintiff issued an electronic tax invoice of KRW 55,043,505 as the person supplied with Defendant C, and issued the revised electronic tax invoice of KRW 39,203,50 on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 55,043,505 to the Plaintiff and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from February 13, 2015 to November 18, 2016, the delivery date of the complaint, which is the service date of the complaint, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the next day to the date of full payment.

3. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff was ordered by the defendant Eul to the original unit of this case, but the defendant C is also in a partnership with the defendant Eul or was supplied with the original unit of this case with the defendant Eul, and the defendant C is also obligated to pay the original unit of this case to the plaintiff.