1. The Defendant’s KRW 41,22,40, and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 6% from January 10, 2017 to August 27, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Around December 2013, the Plaintiff engaged in plastic metal manufacturing business, etc., was commissioned by the Defendant to manufacture automobile mobile towers and plastic outside plastic rinks, etc., and was deposited in a gold paper around February 2014, the Plaintiff produced the said gold paper after receiving payment from the Defendant; thereafter, he produced it after being additionally requested by the Defendant to manufacture the plastic cream; thereafter, from around September 2014, the Plaintiff received a request from the Defendant for the manufacture of plastic cream, etc. using the said gold paper from the Defendant to January 9, 2017, and supplied it.

B. Of the price of goods supplied to the Defendant by January 9, 2017, the Plaintiff did not pay KRW 41,222,400 as of the present price of goods.

C. On May 18, 2018, the Defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Jung-gu District Court 2018da210503, May 18, 2018, where the instant lawsuit is pending. The Defendant’s list submitted to the said court stated the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay for the goods of KRW 41,222,40 to the Plaintiff, and the decision to commence individual rehabilitation has not been made.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 4 through 13 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the unpaid amount of KRW 41,222,400 and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant’s assertion: (a) the Defendant claimed an unreasonably additional claim of KRW 5.7 million out of the gold production cost; (b) the Plaintiff claimed excessive supply volume and value of certain goods among the goods supplied by the Plaintiff; (c) the Plaintiff was partially returned to the Plaintiff; and (d) the Defendant’s payment on February 21, 2017, and February 23, 2017, the sum of KRW 15 million deposited by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff was not supplied with the goods, and thus, the said KRW 15 million should be deducted, and the Plaintiff’s payment on the goods supplied by the Plaintiff was not made; and (e) there was some defective goods among the goods supplied by the Plaintiff. However, the aforementioned assertion is recognized.