1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 20,719,00 and KRW 5,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,719,000 from December 1, 2015, and KRW 6,00,000.

1. The fact of recognition is that the Plaintiff is a business entity manufacturing and wholesale and retailing the pigs Packaging, etc., and the Defendant is a person who operates refined meat points in the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant promised to pay KRW 20,719,000 to the Plaintiff on November 13, 2015, while the Defendant promised to pay KRW 5,000,000 out of the said pigs to the Plaintiff on November 30, 2015, the amount of KRW 6,000,000 until December 10, 2015 can be acknowledged in full view of the respective descriptions in subparagraphs 1 and 2 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings.

2. According to the above findings of determination, with respect to KRW 20,719,000 and KRW 5,000,000 among the above amounts, the defendant filed a claim with the plaintiff for the performance of the obligation from December 1, 2015 to December 11, 2015, and with respect to KRW 6,00,00,00, it is reasonable for each defendant to dispute over the existence or scope of the obligation to perform the obligation until November 15, 2016, and KRW 6% per annum under the Commercial Act until November 15, 2016, and KRW 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day until the day of full payment, and KRW 9,719,000,00, which is calculated with respect to the remaining amount of KRW 9,719,000,00 from March 15, 2016 to the day of full payment of the obligation to perform the obligation.

(1) The Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay from November 14, 2015, after the date agreed by the Defendant. However, as seen earlier, the amount for which the due date has been fixed is calculated from the date following the agreed due date, and the amount for which the due date has not been determined is added to the damages for delay from the date following the Plaintiff’s claim for performance. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay is without merit.