1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 6,121,357 as well as the full payment from June 28, 2014.

1. We examine the principal lawsuit and counterclaim as to the principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

A. The Defendant’s assertion as to the Plaintiff’s claim on the principal claim by the parties is from February 3, 2014 to the same year.

4. By the end of 30.30. the price for the goods unpaid after being supplied with food materials (fishery products) equivalent to the total amount of KRW 8,121,357 from the Plaintiff shall be paid and the delay damages shall be paid.

2) Defendant’s assertion as to the counterclaim (1) even though the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant from July 2013 to December 2014 totaled KRW 78,772,730, the Defendant paid a total of KRW 95,243,130,00 to the Plaintiff exceeding KRW 16,470,403. ② The Defendant issued a tax invoice but did not receive KRW 5,072,035, and ③ the amount at which the period of reduction was 636,950, the Plaintiff was 22,419,711, and delay damages was 36,50,000, the Plaintiff was liable to pay the Defendant the total sum of KRW 1 to 111,00,000, KRW 16,470, KRW 3719, KRW 297, KRW 397, KRW 2597, KRW 397, KRW 297, KRW 2597, KRW 397, KRW 297, etc.).

2) The Defendant’s argument as to the Defendant’s assertion is alleged to be that the Plaintiff arbitrarily claims a unit price, even though there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the unit price for each product. However, according to the respective statements in the evidence Nos. 2 through 6, the Plaintiff’s provision of the unit price to the Defendant is recognized, so the above assertion by the

B. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff goods in excess of the price.

goods or quantities not actually supplied among the amounts requested by the Plaintiff.

or the plaintiff.