1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 19,274,00 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from January 20, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

According to the judgment of Gap 1-9 and 14 (including each number), the plaintiff sold agricultural products to the defendant who operates the enterprise called "B food" by September 15, 2015, and it is recognized that the plaintiff was not paid KRW 19,274,00 for the above goods by the defendant.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 19,274,00 won with the above price for the goods and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 15% per annum as claimed by the plaintiff from January 20, 2016 to the date of full payment, as agreed by the plaintiff, after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant argued that C was supplied with agricultural products by the plaintiff on December 31, 2010 while operating an agricultural product distributor, but the plaintiff discontinued transactions with the plaintiff and transferred his agricultural product distribution enterprise to the defendant under the condition that C did not pay the amount of KRW 20 million out of the price of the goods. The plaintiff argued that C was claiming for the defendant's false claim, and that the defendant did not actually receive the agricultural products claimed by the plaintiff from the plaintiff.

In light of the above evidence, the "Defendant's B food" is indicated as the opposite contractual party in the transaction ledger and transaction specification sheet prepared by the plaintiff (A and A5) and the defendant actually remitted part of the goods price under his/her own name (e.g., according to Gap's entry, the defendant transferred 12.60 million won to the plaintiff on April 22, 2009 as the price for the goods). Thus, it is sufficiently recognized that the transaction was conducted in which the plaintiff supplied the goods such as agricultural products equivalent to the amount claimed by the plaintiff to the defendant.

The testimony of the witness C, which corresponds to the defendant's argument, is merely the defendant in light of the relationship between the defendant and C and the financial resources of C.