1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

2. The defendant shall pay 31,190,500 won to the plaintiff and the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 17, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant “Sari-spawn (hereinafter “Sari-spawn”)” 1,000 kg.

B. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 27 million in total, including KRW 10 million on January 7, 2014, KRW 5 million on February 27, 2014, KRW 3 million on April 2, 2014, KRW 3 million on May 2, 2014, KRW 3 million on June 4, 2014, and KRW 3 million on July 1, 2014.

C. On October 14, 2015, the Plaintiff was returned from the Defendant 432.9kg of the species of this case 1,000 g.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 10, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. On the other hand, the plaintiff alleged that he agreed on 100,000 won per 1kg of the same paper of this case, and the defendant asserted that he agreed on 50,000 won of the same paper of this case. Thus, we examine this issue.

B. In light of the following facts or circumstances, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the response of the order of submission of taxation information to the Director of the Korea Tax Office of the court of the first instance, the evidence as seen earlier, and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is deemed that the plaintiff and the defendant agreed on a 100,000 won per 1 km, and the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to deem that the defendant agreed on a 50,000 won as if the defendant asserted, and there is no other evidence supporting the defendant's

① With respect to the supply of the instant germs, the Plaintiff issued each electronic tax invoice (Evidence No. 3-2) with a quantity of 200,000 won per unit price of 10,000 won on December 2, 2013, and the electronic tax invoice (Evidence No. 3-3) with a unit price of 100,000 won on May 30, 2014, and the electronic tax invoice (Evidence No. 3-3-3) with a unit price of 10,000 won, respectively, to the Defendant, without any objection as seen earlier, filed a value-added tax return on each of the instant electronic tax invoices, as well as on each of the said electronic tax invoices.

(2)