1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the furniture manufacturing business, etc. under the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a corporation that runs soil construction business, etc.

B. On November 21, 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff, respectively, and KRW 20,000,000 on January 20, 2015, and the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 55,00,000 to the Plaintiff who was supplied with the Defendant on January 20, 2015.

C. On April 1, 2015, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a detailed statement on the settlement of the price of the goods for the households supplied by the Plaintiff as KRW 46,80,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 6, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff received KRW 50,000,000 from the Defendant for the goods for the households that were supplied to the Defendant by January 20, 2015, but did not receive the goods price of KRW 46,80,000 for the households that were supplied thereafter, and thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid goods price of KRW 46,80,000 and damages for delay.

As to this, the defendant asserts that 50,000,000 won paid to the plaintiff was paid in advance before being supplied with the household, and received the household after being supplied with the above goods, and that the plaintiff agreed to settle the price of goods at KRW 46,80,000 between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and that there does not exist no amount of goods unpaid to the plaintiff.

B. According to each of the evidence Nos. 1, 5, 7, and 8, the court below found that the Plaintiff manufactured and supplied a household to the Defendant from January 21, 2015 to February 15, 2015. The Defendant sent to the Plaintiff on April 1, 2015 a statement of settlement of the price for the goods to the household supplied by the Plaintiff at KRW 46,80,000,000. However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff was supplied the Defendant by manufacturing and supplying a household of KRW 50,00,000 only on the basis of the evidence Nos. 1, 5, 7, and 8 before January 20, 2015.