1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff supplied vinyl raw materials to the Defendant from around 2003 to 2011.

However, the price of delivered goods that occurred during the above transaction period has been settled by 2015 in a way that the defendant deducts the cost of printing and processing that the defendant should receive from the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant should pay the remaining price of supply as claimed in the purport of the claim.

B. The grounds for the accurate calculation of the claim amount asserted by the Plaintiff are unclear.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods claimed is subject to the period of three or five years of extinctive prescription. Since the last transaction of vinyl raw materials between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was around 2010, the payment order of this case was filed on September 7, 2017, the period of three or five years was terminated.

In addition, even if the Defendant’s claim for offset against the claim for the price of plastic raw materials against the Plaintiff, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant waived the prescription benefit on the claim for the price of goods supplied by the said Plaintiff

2. Determination

A. Even based on the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, it is unclear that the specific basis for calculating the claim amount is unclear.

B. Meanwhile, a set-off defense in a lawsuit has the nature of a preliminary defense that offsets against an automatic claim in a case where the defendant's obligation to pay money is generally acknowledged as a means of attack and defense in the lawsuit.

Therefore, in a case where the grounds for offset are made first and thereafter there was a defense for the lapse of the statute of limitations, it cannot be readily concluded that there was an intent to waive the prescription benefits of the loan claim, which is the debtor, to the defendant at the time of the ground for offset.

(see Supreme Court Decision 201Da21556, Feb. 28, 2013). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the supply of plastic raw materials between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is at least three years as prescribed by Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act or the Commercial Act at the time of applying for the instant payment order.