1. The Defendant’s KRW 94,156,550 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 6% per annum from February 13, 2015 to August 4, 2015, and from August 5, 2015.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. ① At the request of the Defendant who operates the wholesale and retail business of fishery products in the name of D, the fact that the Plaintiff, who runs the wholesale and retail business of fishery products, supplied the Defendant with the total amount of KRW 132,656,550 from June 6, 2013 to September 22, 2014; ② the Defendant paid KRW 38,50,000 out of the price of the said fishery products, and paid the remainder of KRW 94,156,550, the fact that the Defendant did not dispute between the parties, or that the Plaintiff did not pay KRW 94,156,50 in the total amount of KRW 94,150, the evidence No. 1, 2-1 to 5, and 3, may be recognized

B. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from February 13, 2015 to August 4, 2015, which is the delivery date of an application for modification of the purport of the claim, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 5, 2015 to the date of complete payment, which is the delivery date of the application for modification of the purport of the claim, from February 13, 2015.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant, although there were defects in the goods received from the plaintiff, suffered losses due to the plaintiff's failure to avoid returning or refunding the goods. Further, the plaintiff forced the plaintiff to use the defendant's poor situation and experience to set the unit price of the goods at an unreasonable level than that of other companies for obtaining unfair profits. This asserts that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim since the amount of the damage claim or the claim for return of unjust enrichment against the plaintiff exceeds the plaintiff's claim for return of the goods.

B. However, the defendant's assertion or the evidence presented by the defendant alone, as alleged by the defendant, is insufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff suffered losses due to the defect in the goods supplied by the defendant, or that the plaintiff obtained unjust profits without any legal ground, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge

3. The plaintiff's conclusion