1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs the clothes processing business under the trade name of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “E” in Dongdaemun-gu, and the Defendant sold women’s clothes, such as G from Jung-gu, Seoul to G, with the trade name of “G” and has been engaged in continuous transactions since 1998 with the Plaintiff.

B. By June 30, 2012, the Plaintiff supplied clothes using materials provided by the Defendant to the Defendant, and then supplied them to the Defendant’s employee, the head of H division, as the Defendant’s employee, signed the Defendant’s bill of acceptance on the transaction list stating that the unpaid processing fee was totaled KRW 9,797,000, in total.

C. On December 30, 2014, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a message stating that “The President had “The President had been frighted from the end of the end of the 1st day of January 10 to the end of the 10th day of January 10, 2014, to the Mana’s Mana’s Mana.” However, the Defendant did not pay the above processing fee to the Plaintiff up to the day.

I, on May 6, 2015, acknowledged that he signed the telephone conversation with the Plaintiff and brought goods to the buyer’s column, he refers to the “head of H” himself.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3, purport of whole pleading

2. According to the above fact-finding, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 9,797,000 for the processing fee payable to the Plaintiff, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act and 20% per annum as requested by the Plaintiff from July 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint in this case, which is the date of service of the copy of the complaint in this case, and from the next day to the date of full payment.

In this regard, the defendant argued that ① does not have signed the transaction statement at all, and that the signature entered in the column for acceptance on the transaction statement is entirely vague, and ② the defendant sent the message to the plaintiff, but the defendant discontinued the clothing funeral service with the plaintiff.