1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. There is no dispute between the parties to the determination of the cause of the claim, or comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 1 and the purport of the pleading, it is recognized that the Plaintiff, who had engaged in the business of manufacturing and materials, supplied the supplementary materials to the Defendant, who had been engaged in the same business, and the supply price unpaid as of January 22, 2008 remains at KRW 33,146,300. The Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the payment of the unpaid price of supply by March 22, 2008, and the Defendant prepared and executed the "the balance and the payment note (Evidence No. 2-1)" (Evidence No. 2-1) as of January 2

According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 3,146,30 won for the price of delivered goods payable to the plaintiff and damages for delay at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from March 23, 2008 to April 18, 2018, which is the day following the date of payment of the copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant defenses that he paid all the price of delivered goods to the plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the payment.

B. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim for the supply of goods was extinguished due to the completion of prescription.

The claim for the price of delivered goods in this case shall be extinguished by extinctive prescription if it is not exercised for five years pursuant to Article 64 of the Commercial Act.

However, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of delivered goods was filed on March 22, 2008, and it is apparent that the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case was filed on March 21, 2018 after the lapse of five years from the lawsuit. As such, the above claim for the price of delivered goods had already expired before the lawsuit in this case was filed.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is justified.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.