1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. In around 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with C for a payment order claiming payment of KRW 46,625,500 and interest thereon. The payment order (Seoul Northern District Court 2016 tea475) became final and conclusive as it is.

On April 22, 2016, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order (Seoul Northern District Court 2016 Other Bond 5816) with respect to C’s claim for credit based on the above payment order, and the same year.

6. The above order was served on the Defendant.

Meanwhile, the Defendant, as a manufacturer and seller of children’s uniforms, received clothes from C, which operated the mutual intent company “D” between January 2015 and October 201, and paid KRW 121,630,50 in total the amount of goods to C.

[Ground of Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1, 220, 21 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment are as follows: C supplied goods equivalent to the total amount of KRW 157,73,000 ( KRW 146,313,000) to the defendant; thus, the defendant should pay at least KRW 36,102,50, after deducting the total amount of KRW 121,630,00 from the total amount of KRW 157,733,00.

The defendant asserts that since the goods equivalent to KRW 120,440,70 are supplied from C and the above 121,630,500 have already been paid to C, the goods price to be additionally paid to C does not exist and there is no obligation to pay the collection price to the plaintiff.

The Plaintiff’s claim of this case is difficult to accept, on the sole basis of each description of evidence Nos. 4 through 6 (including paper numbers) alone, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that C has supplied the Defendant with goods equivalent to an amount exceeding KRW 120,630,500, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.