1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,229,189 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 6% from March 1, 2019 to April 22, 2019.

The Plaintiff engaged in the simple and fiber processing business in the trade name of “C” has received the price of goods by continuously supplying various rubber lines and ropes, etc. with the trade name of “D,” and the fact that the price of goods has not been paid at KRW 40,229,189 as of February 26, 2019, which is the last transaction date, is not disputed between the parties or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings as set forth in subparagraphs A and 3.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 6% interest per annum from March 1, 2019 to April 22, 2019, which is the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, which is regarded as the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and to pay 15% interest per annum from the following day until May 31, 2019 and 12% interest per annum from June 1, 2019 to the day of complete payment.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that some of the goods price liability has expired by prescription, but does not specifically claim which part has expired by prescription, and even if the three-year prescription has expired, there are the goods price for which three-year prescription has expired.

However, according to the evidence No. 2, it can be deemed that the statute of limitations has been interrupted due to the fact that the defendant paid part of the price on December 2018. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.