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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that runs the hotel products and sales promotional wholesale and retail business, and the Defendant is a corporation that runs the architectural design business.

B. On June 28, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the supply of goods (hereinafter “instant goods supply contract”) with the content that the Plaintiff shall provide the Defendant with original hair (C products), bet, brut, bruer, beerer, and electrical and electrical products, etc., and the Defendant shall pay KRW 21,60,000 to the Plaintiff by June 30, 2018 (hereinafter “instant goods supply contract”).

C. Around June 28, 2018, the Plaintiff supplied all the goods under the instant goods supply contract to the Defendant, but did not receive KRW 10,000,000 out of the price.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 10,00,000 for the goods unpaid and the amount of delay damages calculated by applying each ratio of 12% per annum as prescribed by the Commercial Act from July 1, 2018 to December 27, 2018, the service date of the original copy of the payment order in this case, from the date following the date of the payment order in this case, to the date of the service of the original copy of the payment order in this case, 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings until May 31, 2019, and 12% per annum as from

The defendant asserts that since the original son products supplied by the plaintiff are not domestically produced products but secondary products, the amount of KRW 1,569,700, which is the difference with the original products supplied by the plaintiff, cannot be paid until the price of the goods is deducted from the price of the goods or the goods that the plaintiff supplied to the defendant are replaced by the goods that the plaintiff supplied to the defendant. However, the original son products supplied by the plaintiff are as seen above, the above argument is without merit.

In addition, the defendant will supply the highest level of goods that the plaintiff can use in the tourist hotel, but the goods supplied by the plaintiff are the green line.