1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. In around 2015, the Plaintiff manufactured and supplied school uniforms to the Defendant, and the Defendant entered into a contract to supply the supplied school uniforms to each school. After which, the Defendant entered into a contract to manufacture and deliver the respective school uniforms to C Middle Schools and D High Schools.

B. The Plaintiff manufactured and supplied their school uniforms to the Defendant, but the Defendant completed repair of each school uniform due to the defect of the school uniform.

C. On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff ordered the Defendant to supply Cmiddle School Teachers’ Uniforms. However, the Plaintiff recovered all school uniforms while the Defendant was unable to pay the price in the absence of any defect after examining the product, and the Defendant was unable to deliver the price without receiving it.

On June 12, 2015, the Plaintiff agreed to supply D High School Educational Uniforms to the Defendant, but did not deliver a certificate of content and sent it to the Defendant for the payment of the Educational Uniforms.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 2 through 6, Eul evidence 7-1 to 9, Eul evidence 8, 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment thereon

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff supplied Cmiddle School and D High School’s school uniforms to the Defendant, and the Defendant refused to receive the school uniforms and did not pay the fees, thereby recovering the school uniforms. The Defendant supplied the other school uniforms to the other school uniforms by having the Defendant produce each of the above school uniforms. Since this was impossible due to the Defendant’s fault, the Plaintiff sought compensation for the damages.

B. The written evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 2-1, 2-2, and 3-1, 1-1, 2-2, and 3 are insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff supplied the uniforms of the D High School to the Defendant, or that the Cmiddle School supply was impossible due to a cause attributable to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff’s above assertion is with merit.