1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates the main and gold-type manufacturing business under the trade name of “E”. The Defendants are married couple, and they are also running the main and gold-type manufacturing and selling business after completing business registration with the trade name of “F” in the name of Defendant B.

B. The Defendants changed their trade name to “G” and operated the same kind of business as F around March 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Upon receiving a request from the Defendants for the production of gold bullion from the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff produced and supplied the Defendants the gold bullion amounting to KRW 127,80,000 in total, KRW 46,50,000 on December 20, 201, KRW 46,50,000 on January 5, 2012, KRW 30,000 on January 30, 201, KRW 21,000 on February 25, 2012, KRW 11,000 on March 20, 2012, KRW 127,800,000 on the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 134,50,000 on the transaction list submitted by the Plaintiff, or KRW 134,500 on the total amount of KRW 130,00 on the part of the Plaintiff’s claim and the amount of delay damages.

B. It was true that at the time of the Plaintiff’s operation in the front of the factory run by the Defendants, the Defendants traded with the Plaintiff, including the production, supply, etc. of gold, but the Plaintiff was a director around October 201 and the transaction with the Plaintiff was terminated on or around November 2011, and the unpaid amount was not entirely left, and the Plaintiff did not entirely engage in any transaction with the Plaintiff on the date when the Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff produced and supplied gold to the Defendants. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s request cannot be accepted.

3. Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 10-2, which are consistent with or consistent with the plaintiff's assertion, is limited to the plaintiff's signature and seal on the plaintiff's evidence No. 1, but does not include all the defendants' signature and seal (the plaintiff himself/herself clearly expresses his/her intention to make a retroactive preparation of a later date), and is in the gold production of the defendants' order.