1. The plaintiff's appeal and the extended and added claims by this court are dismissed, respectively.

2. After an appeal is filed.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff establishes a clothing production plant in Indonesia and exports the clothing products. The Defendant is a company that manufactures and exports the clothing products, and the Defendant is a person who supplies the original body for the manufacture of the clothing to the Plaintiff while operating the original body in trade name “B.”

On August 23, 2014, upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with various parts, including Twons and Cwons (hereinafter “instant headquarters”), and the manufacturer agreed to conduct the final inspection in relation to the inspection at the time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 12, the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's assertion of judgment as to this point, ordered the defendant to give weight to "-3% to 8%" and ordered the original parts of this case. The original parts of this case delivered by the defendant are defective parts exceeding the permissible weight.

(Twon is limited to 200 g/m2, or 180 m2, or 191.8 m2, or 180 m2, or 190 m2, or 240 m2, or m240.6 m2, or m240 m2, or m200 m2 as a result of the inspection. As a result, the Plaintiff supplied the product made by using the instant original group and supplied the product at KRW 702,959,040 for the supply price (= KRW 405,259,20 for the supply price of the product made by T original group (“4,776 4,764) x 36.00 for the product price 】 1,180 m29,840 (Exchange) x 5,256 x 408 m2,180 x 90 m209).

Judgment

The fact that the Plaintiff ordered the instant headquarters to the Defendant by setting the weight of 200g/m2, 380g/m2, and 280g/m2, and 3-8% of the weight of Twon group, respectively, is either a dispute between the parties or a dispute between the parties, and the purport of the entire pleadings may be recognized by comprehensively taking into account each entry in the evidence Nos. 18 and 19.

However, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the Defendant delivered.