1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff, in the process, manufacture, and sale of livestock products from May 2014 to July 2015, supplied a chickens to the Defendant. The fact that the Defendant paid the unpaid goods amounting to KRW 50,129,750 may be acknowledged by taking account of the entire purport of the pleadings in each of the entries in the evidence A (including each number) or the parties concerned. Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay KRW 50,129,750 to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On November 2, 2015, the Defendant asserted that, as the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a license use agreement on “C” brand owned by the Defendant and the Defendant’s common representative director, and the Plaintiff agreed to set off the price for the goods against the Defendant’s claim, the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay the price for the goods.

On November 2, 2015, the Defendant granted the Plaintiff the right to conduct franchise business using the Defendant’s brand and D’s portrait rights for five years during the contract period between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on November 2, 2015, and the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant monthly 1,000,000 won (excluding value-added tax) as royalties. However, the agreement was made to offset the Plaintiff by the Defendant’s balance of the Defendant’s goods price of KRW 50,129,750 among the original goods price of KRW 50,129,000,000 at the time of the instant agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”). The agreement was concluded with respect to KRW 50,00 and KRW 50,000,000, excluding the remainder of the original goods price of KRW 50,000,000, and there was no dispute between the parties, or the Plaintiff may be acknowledged as being exempted from the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the Plaintiff’s goods as a whole by taking account of the purport of evidence No. 1.

As such, it can be seen.