1. The Defendant’s KRW 8,835,840 and KRW 1,334,940 among the Plaintiff and KRW 6,600,000 from December 20, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 3, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract between the Defendant and the Plaintiff to supply 520,14,350 won (including value-added tax) of the 6,500 category of the above clothes that the Defendant and the Defendant entered into on August 6, 2013, for a total of 6,500 Won, such as Helculco Co., Ltd. 4,00, Lelel Co., Ltd. 4,00, Lelel Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Selco”) to Lelel Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Selco”), for the supply of 6,500 price for the above clothes manufactured by using raw materials, etc. provided by the Plaintiff, with KRW 120,120,000 (including value-added tax) (hereinafter referred to as “instant processing contract”).

According to the instant contract for the clinical processing, the Defendant supplied 6,50 parts of the clothes 6,500 which the Defendant completed a clinical process around October 1, 2013 to the members No.S., but among them, there were defects, such as the flaz defect, the flaz defect, the flaz defect, the blaz defect, and the blac defect in the Belgium.

Therefore, the member requested repair of the 2,488th of December, 2013, and around January 2014, the 2,597 remaining excluding the 16th of the complete non-repair product that cannot be repaired as a result of repair, and the 2,597 re-delivery of the member to the member Nos. 1, 2, 4-1 through 3, 5-1, 2, 8, 8-1, 9-1, and 10-1, 10, and 10-1, and 10-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the claim for damages due to nonperformance

A. (1) According to the above facts, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages, since he failed to perform his duty to deliver finished products in a defective state in accordance with the contract for the processing of the instant case with respect to the aforesaid Melel Co., Ltd.

(2) this.