1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 900,245,779 and the interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from October 30, 2019 to the date of full payment.

1. The plaintiff is a corporation that runs the textile manufacturing business, and the defendant is a corporation that runs wholesale and retail business, such as raw body, clothing, etc.

In 209 or before that, the Plaintiff has continuously engaged in a continuous transaction of supplying the originals of clothing to the Defendant, and the Defendant operated the business by delivering the originals of clothing supplied by the Plaintiff to the manufacturing company.

After receiving an original supply of the clothing from the Plaintiff, the Defendant left the relevant goods as the outstanding amount due, and thereafter, if the funds are received from the manufacturers of clothing in cash or in bills and secure funds, the Defendant has paid the outstanding amount in a way that the Plaintiff pays the outstanding amount over several times (the due date for the payment of the goods seems not to have been determined separately). The Plaintiff and the Defendant terminated the transaction relationship on September 30, 2019 at the end of the transaction of the goods.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The price of goods that the Plaintiff Defendant paid to the Plaintiff was appropriated in sequence from the existing outstanding amount in the order of the occurrence of the obligation to pay the goods according to the implied agreement.

Since the outstanding amount of KRW 900,245,779 remains after the termination of the transaction relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, the payment is sought.

B. The price of the goods that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff was appropriated for the repayment of the obligation to pay the goods for the transaction most recently formed in the form of monthly settlement according to the implied agreement.

The Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of goods against the Defendant constitutes “price for products and goods sold by manufacturers and merchants” under Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act, and thus the short-term extinction of the three-year statute of limitations is applicable. The Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of goods based on the transaction between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (i.e., until September 30, 2016) prior to October 2016 (i.e., until September 30, 2016) expired by the lapse of the three-year statute of limitations, and thereafter on October 20