1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. As to this part of the basic facts, the Defendant’s grounds for appeal on this part of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, “1. The progress of the instant case,” in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, refers to the following: (a) the Defendant’s grounds for appeal on this part of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, are not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court; and (b) the fact-finding and determination of the first instance court are legitimate even if each evidence submitted to the first instance court was presented to this court. The grounds for appeal on this part

(However, unless there are special circumstances, the defendant is obliged to pay 131,981,463 won for the goods and delay damages to the plaintiff. 3. Judgment on the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription is made on March 3.

A. The Defendant’s assertion and determination (1) that the statute of limitations has expired in all prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, even if the Defendant had the obligation to pay the price of the instant goods to the Defendant, the obligation to pay the price of goods was applied by the short-term extinctive prescription of three years

(2) The goods payment obligation is the “price for the goods sold by the merchants” and the three-year short-term extinctive prescription is applied pursuant to Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act.

In addition, even in the case where the supply was continued as in the instant supply, barring any special circumstance, a three-year short-term extinctive prescription period for each portion of the supply would continue, barring any special circumstance, and the three-year short-term extinctive prescription for the portion of the supply from the end of the supply to the end

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Da10152, Jan. 21, 1992; 2006Da68940, Jan. 25, 2007). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, health class, synthetic resin, etc. supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant constitutes the price for the goods sold by the merchants, three-year extinctive prescription is applicable, and the Plaintiff’s objection on September 19, 2017.