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. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and all pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff and the defendant agreed on July 3, 2012 to determine the balance of the defendant's obligation to pay for goods to the plaintiff at KRW 27,500,000 (hereinafter "the agreement of this case"). Accordingly, the defendant agreed on July 10, 2012, and the same month to the plaintiff.

4. It is recognized that the sum of KRW 22,50,000,000 for 22,50,000 for 16.10,000 for the same month has been paid.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 5,00,000 won for the remainder of the goods under the agreement of this case and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant asserts that since the plaintiff provided an illegal software to the defendant and caused the defendant to be liable for damages for the use of the illegal software, the defendant's damage claim against the plaintiff and the plaintiff's damage claim against the defendant should be offset. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the plaintiff provided the illegal software to the defendant. Rather, according to each of the evidence Nos. 11 and No. 14-1, the plaintiff can recognize the fact that the plaintiff did not provide the software to the defendant. Thus, the defendant's defense

B. On July 3, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 5,00,000 to the Plaintiff after the computer A/S maintenance fee when they agreed on the remainder of the goods payment obligation. The Plaintiff refused the Defendant’s request for A/S, and the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay it to the Plaintiff.

However, in light of the following circumstances, the plaintiff's office is not immediate A/S support in Busan, i.e., the plaintiff's basic A/S. employees from November 201 to July 2012.