1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the lower judgment to the lower court's lower court's lower court's lower judgment at the seventh and seventh levels, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

[Defendant] Article 69(1) and Article 69(1) of the Commercial Act (Duty of Buyer to Inspection of Subject Matter and to Notify Defects) (1) of the Commercial Act in the course of trading between merchants, when a buyer receives an object, he/she shall inspect it without delay, and when any defect or shortage in quantity is discovered, he/she shall not claim cancellation of the contract, reduction in the price, or compensation for damages unless he/she immediately notifies the seller thereof.

Where any defect which can not be immediately discovered in the subject matter of the sale has been discovered, the same shall also apply where the buyer finds such defect within six months.

Accordingly, the defendant's assertion that it can not be argued that it was supplied less than the amount of credit supplied by the defendant.

On the other hand, Article 69(1) of the Commercial Act is a special rule for the seller's warranty liability under the Civil Act, and the seller's duty to inspect the buyer's object of sale and to notify defects in the sale between merchants is a prerequisite for asking the seller for warranty liability with respect to the object of sale and purchase (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Da3671, May 15, 2008; 2008Da3671, Dec. 21, 1990; 90Da28498, 28504, Dec. 21, 1990). Article 69(1) of the Commercial Act does not apply to this case where the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to cancel the contract, reduce the price, or pay damages according to warranty liability under the

The defendant's above assertion on a different premise is without merit to examine the remaining points.

[Attachment] The Act

2. If so, the plaintiff's claim.