1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s claim amounting to KRW 31,00,000 for the Plaintiff’s attempted goods by supplying telecommunications-related goods, such as satellite antenna, to the Defendant is either a dispute between the parties, or is recognized by the purport of each entry and pleading set forth in the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the serial number), and thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 31,00,000 and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defense

A. The defendant's defense that the plaintiff's non-paid goods payment obligation has expired the three-year short-term extinctive prescription.

B. According to Gap evidence No. 2-2, the plaintiff was found to have supplied the last goods on March 30, 2007, and it is apparent in the record that the plaintiff applied for the payment order of this case on October 29, 2015. Thus, since the three-year extinctive prescription expires pursuant to Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Code, the defendant's defense is reasonable, and the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

(3) The plaintiff's claim is dismissed on the ground that, even if following the plaintiff's statement at the time of pleading, it was found that the defendant failed to make a demand to the other defendant at the later time in 2007, and even if the extinctive prescription has been interrupted, the extinctive prescription of three years has passed since it was interrupted).