1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 73,890,795 and the interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from July 10, 2019 to the day of complete payment.

1. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff supplied gold-producing products to the Defendant from April 30, 2016 to February 28, 2019, and the Defendant paid a total of KRW 80,265,295 up to that time, and around March 2019, the original Defendant returned part of the above products supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant and issued a revised tax invoice of KRW 6,374,50 (mausp) to the Defendant.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 73,890,795 won (=80,265,295 won - 6,374,500 won) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from July 10, 2019 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff.

2. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant asserts that since additional defects have been discovered after the processing of the revised tax invoice on the products supplied by the plaintiff, they should be returned and settled. In principle, in the sale between merchants, the defendant can claim for the reduction of the price, compensation for damages, etc. only if the buyer, without delay, inspects the defects or lack of quantity when the goods are received, and notifies the seller thereof at the time of receipt of the goods (Article 69 (1) of the Commercial Act). There is no evidence to find that the defendant raised an objection against the defects of the products at the time of supply by the plaintiff, and further, there is insufficient evidence to find the fact that the defects are difficult to be immediately discovered due to the nature of the products supplied by the plaintiff from the video of the evidence Nos. 3, 9, and 12, and there is no other evidence to find this otherwise. Accordingly, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.