1. The Defendant’s KRW 14,35,968 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from May 1, 2014 to November 27, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that supplies and sells production materials acquired through trade, etc. to manufacturers, etc. which require such materials to wholesale and retail, and the Defendant is a company that manufactures the packaging paper of food, etc.

B. On November 5, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for about 27 tons each month with 0.06m thickness of the material A1235-0, 730m width, 12,200m length and about 5,250m aluminium-type Aluminum-type Aluminum-type: (a) 27m each month with 27m each month, respectively; (b) 0.016m in thickness of the material of PET (PT) (T), 730m in width, 12,150m length, and 3,200m in length (excluding value-added tax, and 3,200m in length) with the content of the contract for each 27m tonnage each month (hereinafter “instant contract”).

On the other hand, in relation to the payment period of the above 2 products, all of the above 2 products are written as follows: “The first two-month forecast after the contract was made (which can be delivered immediately by holding a stock)”; “50% in cash as of the end of the following month after the end of the month; 50% in lives bill (within the last three months).”

C. On November 5, 2013, the Plaintiff imported PE film 11,771.6 km from the company located in Thailand, and around the 12th day of the same month from the company located in Thai Kong, respectively. D.

Around March 2014, the Defendant accepted 2,592km-day and 3,531.6 km-day and PET film 3,531.6 km-day, part of the above import volume, and paid 24,909,120 won to the Plaintiff. The goods listed in the attached list (AET film 9,504 km-day and PET film 8,240 g) that the Defendant did not accept are kept in the warehouse business owner, Inc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The summary of the party’s assertion is ① the Plaintiff primarily, and the instant contract is not a single contract for the supply of raw materials produced by the Defendant.