1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,000,000 as well as 6% per annum from September 1, 2003 to November 1, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff, who manufactured and supplied security-oriented products, supplied the digital delivery (name of goods: E) to the Defendant from around 2000 to 2003.

B. The defendant on June 26, 2006 the plaintiff by the end of August 2003.

I prepared a letter of intent to pay KRW 40 million as the price for the goods described in the subsection (hereinafter referred to as “instant goods”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap 1 through 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the price of KRW 40,000,000 for goods and delay damages.

3. The defendant's defense and the plaintiff's defense

A. The judgment on the claim of revocation was made by the defendant that the plaintiff would arrange to export the defendant's goods so that they can be exported, and the defendant agreed to pay KRW 40 million out of the credit outstanding to the plaintiff to the end of August 2006. However, although the plaintiff failed to engage in export transactions and thus the contract of this case was revoked, it is not sufficient to acknowledge this only with the statement of Gap 4, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. 1) The Defendant’s claim for the payment of goods in this case constitutes a commercial claim, and the extinctive prescription has expired more than five years after August 30, 2003, the due date for the payment of goods in this case. In addition, the claim for the payment of goods in this case has not been exercised for three years pursuant to Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act in consideration of the goods sold by the merchants. The extinctive prescription period is completed. The lawsuit in this case appears to have been extended on August 31, 2003 (the due date for the payment of the goods in this case is extended due to the letter of this case).

Since it is apparent in the record that the claim for the price of the instant goods was filed on October 24, 2018, three years ago, the extinctive prescription for the claim for the price of the instant goods.