1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1,457,082,010 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from April 9, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Fact 1) The Plaintiff is a company engaged in the automobile parts manufacturing business, sales and distribution business, and machinery assembly business. The Defendant is a company engaged in automobile parts manufacturing business, lease business, etc. (2) The Plaintiff received 162 types of automobile parts from the Defendant around August 2010 by increasing the types of automobile parts supplied until March 2016 after the commencement of the supply of '8050-M541 CUSPS' parts among modern automobile parts produced from the Defendant.

3) On March 11, 2016, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to suspend the operation of Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Complex, which was KRW 9.7 billion, but the Plaintiff discontinued the supply of the automobile parts supplied to the Plaintiff from March 14, 2016, and the Plaintiff did not comply with the said demand. 4) The Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to settle the transactional relationship with the suspension of the supply of the automobile parts. On March 30, 2016, the Plaintiff agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 1,457,082,00,010, including the amount to be returned out of the advance payment for the goods, the amount of damages incurred by the defective parts of the automobile, and the amount of damages incurred by the discontinuance of the transaction.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 1,457,082,010, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from April 9, 2016 to the date of full payment, which is obvious that it is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

2. Judgment on the defense

A. From March 16, 2016 to March 18, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted by the Defendant left the Defendant’s machinery and equipment equivalent to KRW 1,588,600,00, owned by the Defendant under the pretext of collecting the claim for the settlement of accounts against the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is reasonable.