1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 185,209,629 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 27, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. The Plaintiff continued to supply steel materials to the Defendant, and the fact that the remaining amount of the goods is 185,209,629 is no dispute between the parties. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from December 27, 2017 to the date of full payment, as sought by the Plaintiff, as to the remaining amount of the goods at KRW 185,209,629, and the aforementioned amount, barring special circumstances.

(2) On December 2, 198, the Defendant filed a defense to the effect that other lawsuits are unlawful, but sought a “Dismissal of a claim” in the reply. As such, the Defendant’s assertion is a general defense seeking a rejection of a claim, and the items are included as the Defendant’s assertion, and the lawsuit is unlawful. As such, the Defendant’s assertion to the effect that the lawsuit is unlawful is against the law.

Determination on the Grounds for Appeal

A. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion was difficult to operate the company from November 2017 and faced with the crisis of the company. Around December 2017, 35, the creditors of the 35 Defendant organized a claim group to collect the total amount of KRW 4,036,265,833 of the claim by representing Tae Steel Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Seoul Steel”), and the Plaintiff, the representative of the above claim group, transferred the stocks of the Defendant’s garnishee’s claim amounting to KRW 2.6 billion to the claim group, and agreed that “after transferring the inventory and sales claim to the claim group, the claim would no longer be collected to the Defendant.” Since the Plaintiff also subscribed to the above claim group, the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of the goods in this case would lose the ability and executory power of filing an ordinary claim in accordance with the above special agreement, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for the collection of the goods in this case is unlawful or unlawful as a natural action against the foregoing.