The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following cases.

2. The height of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: 5 pages 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance with "No. 9-1 of the evidence" as "No. 9-1, 26-2, 3-3 of the evidence."

The 6th 5th 6th 5th , 7th 9th , 16th , 8th 13th , 9th 4th , 10th 5th , 6th , and 14th , respectively, shall be appointed as the "expert in the first instance."

The 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 10th 15th 10th 10th 10th 1st 1st 2th 202

The first instance court’s 11th 16th 1th 16th am “A.C.” (one day, among the details of the Plaintiff’s damage, some of the details that the Plaintiff received from the Plaintiff’s customer in foreign currency and disbursed in foreign currency. However, the Plaintiff claims damages in Korean currency with respect to all such damages, and the Defendant also does not dispute the standard currency. The Plaintiff’s claim in this case is seeking compensation for damages incurred in the actual occurrence of foreign currency at the time of the Plaintiff’s foreign currency payment, and it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s damage claim against the Defendant on the damage is a foreign currency claim. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the obligee’s claim in this case is a foreign currency claim. Therefore, it is difficult to view that the Supreme Court Decision 2009Da7754 Decided October 25, 2012, to order performance of the amount to be converted into Korean currency based on the foreign exchange market value at the time of the closing of the trial court’s argument.”

From the 11th judgment of the first instance court, the 19th to 21th judgment are as follows:

② With respect to the defect of the instant parts, the Plaintiff’s employee, U.S.A.