1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the oral argument, the defendant purchased 14,50,000 won of cosmetics from the plaintiff on October 25, 2005, and paid 10,000 won as down payment, and the remaining 5,40,000 won shall be paid 10 times every 30 days from November 30, 2005 to August 30, 2006, and where the payment of the above installment is made two consecutive times or more, the defendant shall be paid 14-day interest after the expiration of the 14-day performance period and 24% interest per annum according to the plaintiff's highest notice. The defendant did not pay the above installment at all, and the defendant did not pay the above installment at all, but did not respond to the plaintiff's demand of payment on January 14, 2006, and thus, the defendant lost the interest of 250,000 won and damages for delay by 24,000 won.

In regard to this, the defendant defense that the plaintiff's claim for the above installment payment has expired by the prescription, and the period of extinctive prescription is three years pursuant to Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Code, and the period of payment is February 14, 2006, when the defendant lost the benefit of the deadline. Since it is obvious that the plaintiff applied for the payment order of this case on January 23, 2014, which was three years after the plaintiff passed since it was obvious that the above installment payment claim had already expired by prescription before the application for the payment order of this case (the final payment period of the above installment payment claim of August 30, 2006, even if the plaintiff did not lose the benefit of the deadline was not lost), the defendant's defense is justified.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.