1. The Defendant’s KRW 73,380,00 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from July 20, 2017 to October 16, 2017.

1. The Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with a uniform of KRW 7,838,00,000,000,000 for KRW 3,8966,00 on July 18, 2017, and KRW 3,942,00 on July 19, 2017, and the Defendant paid KRW 5,00,00 to the Plaintiff on September 12, 2017 may be recognized by taking into account all the arguments as a whole, without any dispute between the parties, or by taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2.

According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remaining amount of KRW 78,3380,000 (=78,388,000 - five million).

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Defendant’s previous uniforms supplied to the Defendant by the Plaintiff was not good from the time of delivery. A large volume of waste was generated since around three days after delivery.

Accordingly, with the consent of the plaintiff, the defendant kept the whole of the whole clothes supplied by the plaintiff in freezing, and the plaintiff agreed to cancel the transaction of the whole clothes of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is not obliged to pay the return to the plaintiff.

B. According to each video and witness B and C’s testimony of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the Plaintiff made a statement to the effect that, at the time of the delivery of the entire uniform to the Defendant, employees B belonging to the Defendant at the time of the delivery of the entire uniform to the Plaintiff that the employee B was not in a state of the entire uniform to the Plaintiff; the Defendant made a statement that, after the delivery of the uniform from the Plaintiff, the delivery of the entire uniform to the Plaintiff was caused by the death of the entire uniform supplied to the Plaintiff; the fact that the Defendant kept the remainder of the entire uniform

However, the above facts alone revealed that there were defects in the whole of the pre-delivery supplied by the Plaintiff.

For this reason, an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to cancel the transaction of the pre-delivery of this case by consenting to freezing the boom and finding it.