1. The Defendant’s KRW 48,519,575 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 6% per annum from December 31, 2013 to July 14, 2015.

1. Basic facts are based on the Plaintiff: (a) around March 2006, the Plaintiff was a company engaging in the wholesale business of petroleum gas; and (b) around March 2006, by taking over the difficulty in the heavy industry located in the Gwangju City from Nonparty Large Gas Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “large Gas”), to the present day; and (c) the Defendant operated the gas sales business in the trade name of “B” in the Gyeonggi-si; (d) around April 11, 2005, when operating the gas sales business in the trade name of “B,” the Plaintiff was supplied with heavy gas Co., Ltd.; and (e) around April 2006, the Plaintiff was supplied with propane and but completed the transaction with the Plaintiff, there is no dispute between the parties.

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The gas supply transaction between the Plaintiff and the Defendant ordered the amount of gas to the extent necessary for the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff supplied the amount of gas to the Plaintiff on credit within the limit of credit, and the Defendant settled the amount of gas payment once a month, and the sales price thereof was determined through consultation with the Defendant when the Plaintiff notified the Defendant, who was a distributor, of the sales price determined in consideration of various expenses, etc. at the price supplied from the oil refinery, as text messages, etc., and thereafter, the price was determined through consultation with the Defendant. The transaction balance was confirmed by the Defendant through

As a result, the credit payment amount reaches 48,519,575 won at the time of the termination of the transaction.

B. The Defendant, instead of taking the responsibility of the Defendant for transporting and examining gas and gas containers, has traded the gas selling price by adding 30 won to the 1kg price that the gas was purchased from the oil refinery. The Plaintiff agreed to take over the filling station from the gas gas to make a transaction under the same conditions as the gas was traded with the gas.

The plaintiff issued a written request for trading and deposit to the defendant at the beginning of each month, and the defendant did not think that the plaintiff would charge the sales price by deceiving the sales price, and without doubt, the plaintiff claims.