1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Basic Facts

The plaintiff is a person engaged in the manufacturing business in the trade name of "B", and the defendant is a company engaged in the manufacturing business of various facilities, etc.

On October 18, 2012, the Plaintiff produced and supplied the Defendant the Slides Pate amounting to KRW 1,584,000,000, and KRW 550,000,000, around October 30, 2012.

On or before November 7, 2012, the Plaintiff first received the production drawings of goods from the Defendant, and submitted a written estimate to the Defendant on November 7, 2012, and ordered the Defendant to manufacture the goods by determining the delivery period on November 8, 2012 as the delivery period until November 18, 2012.

On November 15, 2012, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to produce additional goods and sent the drawings to the Plaintiff.

On December 3, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the production of the goods (Dek, Stirs and Group Report) that was finally requested to the Defendant, and completed the supply.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 13 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the ground for claim of the whole purport of the pleadings, the drawings were modified several times after the plaintiff defendant requested the plaintiff to manufacture the goods, and the production of the goods was delayed, and the goods was completed on December 3, 2012 and delivered to the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 49,874,000 won in total after deducting 1,800,000 won in the cost of repairing defective goods and the additional tax [(45,200,000 won-1,80,000 won)] x 12,134,000 won in total and damages for delay.

The Defendant initially requested the Plaintiff to manufacture goods at KRW 2,00,00 per ton of the material costs and production costs for the goods totaled of KRW 13,964.5km (Dek and Stirs 7,196.7kg Group Report). As asserted by the Plaintiff, there was no production increase factor following the change in the Plaintiff’s drawings. The Defendant did not submit the materials cost and labor cost change according to the modified drawings. Therefore, the Defendant did not submit the materials cost and labor cost change.