1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,471,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from February 23, 2016 to July 8, 2016.

According to the evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 3, 2, 3, and 4 of the evidence Nos. 1-1, 2-2, 3-2, and 4, in the name of B, C engaged in the manufacturing industry, such as metal manufacturing, mail box, etc. with the trade name of B from Sep. 2014 to Nov. 201, 2014, supplied goods equivalent to the sum of KRW 33,511,500, such as keys, keys, keys, and mail box, to the Defendant who mainly takes charge of the construction business of steel products, etc., the fact that C entered into an agreement on the assignment of claims with the Plaintiff on Nov. 5, 2015, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims on the next day, and that C received KRW 3,040,500 from the Defendant on Nov. 9, 2015.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 30,471,00 won (33,511,500 won - 3,040,500 won) and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 15% per annum under the Commercial Act from February 23, 2016, which is the date when the defendant delivered a copy of the complaint of this case until July 8, 2016, when disputes over the existence and scope of the defendant's obligation to pay to the plaintiff 30,471,00 won (33,511,500 won - 3,040,500 won).

(A) The Plaintiff filed a claim for late payment from November 9, 2015, which is the notification date of the assignment of the claim. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was the agreed payment date of the above claim for the above claim for the price of the goods, and the claim for the price of the goods is liable for delay from the time when the Defendant received the claim for performance. However, the notification of the assignment of claim by the transferor cannot be deemed to have filed a claim for performance with the Defendant. There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff filed a claim for performance of the above goods to the Defendant prior to the delivery of the copy of the claim in this case.