1. Defendant A Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 123,103,155 as well as its annual interest from December 17, 2014 to December 29, 2014.

1. Basic facts [The fact that there is no dispute as to the defendant corporation A, which is a ground for recognition, as to the confession (Article 150 (3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act): The entries in the evidence No. 5, the evidence No. 6-1 through 5, the evidence No. 7-1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings as to the confession No. 7];

A. The Plaintiff is a stock company that manufactures and sells cement mortars, steplates, etc., and the Defendant A (hereinafter “A”) is a stock company that runs wholesale and retail business, such as building materials and interior and outside of the interior and outside of the Republic of Korea.

On the other hand, Defendant B is an internal director of Defendant A.

B. From January 2013, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant A with cement and stelocks, etc., and the supply price from May 2014 to September 2014 is as follows:

The supply term supply price of KRW 44,740,750 from May 1, 2014 to May 31, 2014; KRW 5,264,90 on June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014; KRW 44,740,750 on July 1, 2014 to July 31, 2014; KRW 37,353,750 on August 1, 2014 to August 16, 2014 to August 31, 2014; KRW 42,000 on September 1, 201 to September 30, 201 to September 30, 2014; KRW 15,751,400 on the aggregate;

C. On the other hand, on November 4, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a contract for the supply of goods with Defendant A for one-year term of validity of the contract with Defendant A, and Defendant B guaranteed Defendant A’s obligation under the said contract on the same day.

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant did not receive KRW 123,103,155 out of the amount of goods sold by the Defendant A, and the said Defendant is liable to pay the amount of the goods unpaid.

In addition, Defendant A, the representative director of the C, was dead on October 2014, operated as the actual representative of Defendant B, and Defendant B, on November 4, 2014, concluded to the effect that Defendant A would be liable for the settlement of the goods payment obligation already incurred while jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant A’s obligation to the Plaintiff on November 4, 2014. Thus, Defendant A is jointly and severally liable for the payment of the unpaid goods.

B. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant A, Defendant A shall be subject to the judgment of the court below.