1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant supplied the Plaintiff, who runs plastic surface processing business, etc. with the trade name “B”.

B. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff against the Plaintiff to pay KRW 12,540,00,00, which is the price for the attempted arrival, supplied from April 2014 to May 2014, and delay damages therefor, to the Plaintiff. In the said lawsuit, the Defendant served the notice of performance recommendation on February 5, 2015 on the Plaintiff and became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant decision on performance recommendation”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff was supplied with contact points only from the Defendant until April 2014, and the subsequent goods were fully repaid.

B. Even if there remains no attempted proceeds of the above transaction, since there was a defect in the contactal system supplied by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, thereby causing damage to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff did not pay any money to the Plaintiff if it offsets the price of the goods.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the decision of execution recommendation of this case should be rejected.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances that can be known by the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including serial numbers for those with serial numbers) and the entire pleadings as to the existence of an attempted price for the supply of goods, the Defendant is recognized as not having supplied the Plaintiff with 12,540,000 won as indicated between April 201 and May 2015, in addition to the transactions for which the Plaintiff claimed that the Plaintiff paid the price for the goods as above, in addition to the transactions for which it was claimed that the Plaintiff paid the price for the goods.

1. During the transaction period with the Plaintiff, the Defendant issued four copies of the statement of transaction in which delivery was entered as follows, and among them, the statement of transaction Nos. 2 was directly signed by the Plaintiff, and the remaining statement of transaction was signed or signed by C and D, an employee of the Plaintiff, as follows:

C C CD.