1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 22,134,288 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from January 21, 2015 to July 15, 2015.

.... 본소 청구에 대한 판단 원고가 2011. 3. 22.경부터 2015. 1. 20.경까지 피고에게 케이블{CABLE EVV(E)2C*0.75㎟ 2.0㎟}을 비롯하여 합계 243,102,618원 상당의 물품을 공급하고, 원고로부터 그 중 220,968,330원을 지급받은 사실은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없거나, 갑 제1, 2호증, 갑 제4, 5호증, 갑 제8호증(각 가지번호 포함)의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하여 이를 인정할 수 있다.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 22,134,288 won of the remainder of the goods and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum prescribed by the Commercial Act from January 21, 2015 to July 15, 2015, which is the delivery date of the application for amendment of the purport of the claim of this case, and 20% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense and counterclaim

A. As to this, the Defendant alleged to the effect that the cables supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant are not EV (E) cables but rather VCF (0.7 x 3C) cables with low manufacturing costs, and thus, it cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s remaining claims for the payment of the remainder of the goods. However, in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the evidence Nos. 10 and 11, the Plaintiff appears to have received EV (E) cable samples from the Defendant and supplied the cables produced therefrom, and there is no evidence to deem that the products supplied by the Plaintiff, as claimed by the Defendant, are products with different manufacturing costs.

The above argument by the defendant is rejected.

B. Next, even though the cable supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is at least 350 won per meter per the market price, the Plaintiff supplied 580 won per 1m above the normal price by taking advantage of the fact that the transaction partner, etc., who was in the Defendant’s transaction, was bankrupt and was in a bad condition. Thus, the Defendant is not liable to the Plaintiff.