1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same part as the statement of the judgment of the court of first instance, except in the following cases: (b) the part concerning “decision on the defendant’s defense” presented between the 6th and 7th 14th of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the statement of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance

2. 고쳐 쓰는 부분 『나. 피고의 항변에 관한 판단 1) 이에 대하여 피고는, 원고가 피고에게 공급한 두유에는 묽기나 맛이 일정하지 아니하는 등의 하자가 있어 원고의 대표이사는 2012. 가을 무렵 하자 있는 48,569,738원 상당의 물품을 정상제품으로 무상공급하기로 약정하였고, 2013. 3.경 이 사건 협의서 작성 당시에는 이에 관한 자료를 원고에게 보내기로 협의되어 위 협의서에 ①항 기재와 같은 내용이 추가되었으며, 위 협의서 작성 이후에도 원고의 대표이사가 정상제품의 무상공급을 재차 약속하기도 하였으나, 원고는 이러한 약정을 이행하지 아니하였으므로 위 48,569,738원 상당의 물품대금이 추가로 공제되어야 한다고 주장한다.

However, it is not sufficient to recognize the defendant's above assertion only with the statement of No. 1, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it differently.

Rather, according to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff supplied the defendant with the goods equivalent to KRW 49,049,738 from June 1, 201 to March 30, 201, and there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the plaintiff did not supply the goods to any place other than the defendant for the above period. The defendant's above assertion was defective in all of the two products except the "J" that the defendant himself does not own goods among the products produced and supplied during the above period, and the plaintiff also agreed that the amount equivalent to the two products already supplied should be supplied free of charge.