1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The defendant asserts to the effect that the plaintiff's filing of an objection on the grounds of the reasons before the decision on performance recommendation of this case becomes final and conclusive is unlawful as it goes against the res judicata.

Article 5-7 (1) of the Trial of Small Claims Act provides that when the defendant does not raise an objection within a fixed period of time, a decision of rejection of objection, or an objection is withdrawn, the decision of execution recommendation shall have the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment.

However, unlike Article 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act, which limits the grounds for objection to a final and conclusive judgment to be arising after the pleadings have been closed (in the case of a judgment without holding any pleadings, after a judgment is pronounced), Article 5-8(3) of the Trial of Small Claims Act provides that any objection to a request for a decision on performance recommendation shall not be subject to the restriction pursuant to the above Civil Execution Act. Therefore, the grounds arising prior to the said decision on performance recommendation may also be asserted in a lawsuit for objection to

In light of this, the purport of the above provisions of the Trial of Small Claims Act is to recognize incidental effects such as executory power and legal requisite effects, excluding res judicata, among the effects of final and conclusive decision of performance recommendation, and it does not recognize res judicata.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da34190 Decided May 14, 2009). Accordingly, the Defendant’s defense on this part of this case’s defense is without merit.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) there was a defect in 10,131 inventory goods (hereinafter “instant inventory goods”) from among golf clubs supplied under the instant goods supply contract; and (b) the Plaintiff failed to sell 4,245 of them; and (c) on the ground of incomplete performance by the Defendant with respect to the said unsold goods.