1. The Defendant’s KRW 39,547,431 and KRW 14,501,30 among the Plaintiff and KRW 14,501,30 from May 11, 2013, KRW 11,726,143.

1. On December 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a discretionary processing contract with the Defendant for the manufacture and processing of original yarn, and supplied it to the Defendant from around that time. From March 2013, 11,726,143, the processing cost for the first half of April 2013, the processing cost for the first half of May 2013, 8,320,69,69,291 won for the first half of June 2013, and the first half of June 2013. According to the above processing contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant calculated the processing cost for the first half of the month that the Plaintiff supplied original yarn and supplied it to the Defendant, and the Defendant did not agree to pay it by the tenth day of the following month.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 39,547,431, total processing costs for March or June, 2013, and KRW 14,501,30, which is the date following the due date for the payment, to the Plaintiff for KRW 11,726,143, which is the date for the payment, from May 11, 2013; KRW 8,320,69, which is the date for the payment, from June 11, 2013 to June 11, 2013; KRW 4,99,291, which is the date for the payment, to the date for the full payment of KRW 14,50,00,00, which is the date for the payment, to the date for the full payment of KRW 11,726,143, which is the date for the payment.

2. As to the determination of the defense, the defendant argued to the effect that the above damage claim of the defendant was offset against the plaintiff's claim for the payment of the above goods since the defendant suffered damage from the defendant's delivery place due to defects in the original unit supplied by the plaintiff, so it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff's damage claim was defective on the original unit supplied by the defendant alone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.