1. The defendant shall pay to an independent party intervenor KRW 69,512,188 as well as his/her annual interest from September 5, 2014 to November 14, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 25, 2009, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor of an independent party (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) filed a marriage report and reported the divorce on December 20, 2016. On January 1, 2009, the Intervenor completed business registration with the trade name “D” under the Plaintiff’s name and closed down business on February 21, 2017.

The defendant runs the business of construction and construction in the name of "E".

B. An intervenor has transacted from around September 2008, including the supply of substitute stones, etc. to the Defendant. The price of goods not paid by the Defendant by September 4, 2014 is KRW 69,512,188 (hereinafter “the price of the goods in this case”).

(A) On September 3, 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 2.8 million to the Intervenor as part of the price of the goods, and the Intervenor supplied the goods equivalent to KRW 2,844,000 to the Defendant on September 4, 2014, the last transactional relationship was terminated. [Grounds for recognition] Facts that there is no dispute, each entry in Gap Nos. 1, 2, and Byung Nos. 1 through 3 (including the serial number), and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the intervenors 69,512,188 won for the unpaid goods and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from September 5, 2014 to November 14, 2018, which is the day following the day this judgment is rendered, and 15% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant asserted that the intervenor paid all the price of the goods of this case, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this. The defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The Defendant, on September 4, 2014, filed a claim for the price of the instant goods on the premise that the Intervenor had failed to pay for the goods in KRW 69,512,188, but the claim for the price of the instant goods is three years.