1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant, who runs the business of manufacturing and selling the ice lease, supplied the ice lease products to the Plaintiff from May 18, 2009 to July 20, 2010.

B. On February 10, 2011, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order seeking payment of goods with Busan District Court Decision 201Hu2387, and the said court issued a payment order with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order to the day of complete payment” (hereinafter “instant payment order”).

On February 28, 2011, the Defendant received the instant payment order, and around that time, the instant payment order became final and conclusive.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 2-2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, fact-finding results on the D Accounting Office of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant claimed the price of the goods supplied on or around October 2010 (hereinafter "the price of the goods of this case") through the payment order of this case. The defendant did not submit objective data on the goods, and the plaintiff paid all the price of the goods of this case to the defendant.

Although the Defendant asserts in the instant reply that the instant claim for the price of goods supplied to the Plaintiff from May 18, 2009 to July 20, 2010 (hereinafter “the outstanding claim”), it is a separate claim that differs in nature from the instant claim for the price of goods and the claim for the outstanding amount, and the Defendant’s claim for the outstanding amount has already been extinguished by the extinctive prescription. Even if the Plaintiff bears the instant claim for the price of goods, the Plaintiff paid KRW 13,358,350 to the Defendant around November 11, 2010, since the Plaintiff paid KRW 13,358,350 to the Defendant, the Plaintiff paid the difference between the price of the instant goods and the payment of KRW 13,358,350 to the Defendant.