1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. Around October 2013, 2013, Gainging Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Gaing”) entered into a supply contract with the dong Mine Comprehensive Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Dong Mine Comprehensive Co., Ltd.”) on the construction site for female B apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) and the supply contract with the unit units, households, and common part of the apartment site. Of them, the contract amount for the common part, etc. was set at KRW 51,700,000.

B. On October 22, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied a registered LED 22W 840 feet at the construction site of the instant apartment parking site at the construction site on November 8, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lamps”).

C. Since then, on November 9, 2013, Gaving entered the bankruptcy procedure due to the default of payment, the Dong light comprehensive earth returned and disposed of the instant lamps supplied by the Plaintiff in the document form with the documents, and around November 13, 2013, the Defendant and the Defendant engaged in the manufacturing of lighting fixtures with the trade name “C” entered into a supply contract with the unit units and the public partic, etc. for the apartment construction site of this case (hereinafter “supply contract of this case”). The contract amount of the unit household and the unit household were 426,80,000 won, and the contract amount of the public partic, etc. was 51,700,000 won.

Around December 31, 2013, the Defendant filed a claim for a partial reduction of KRW 50,000,000 under the name of “NEGO” and filed a claim for a reduction of KRW 50,000,000,000,000,000 with the Defendant, which was supplied by the Plaintiff, in the instant apartment site. In accordance with the foregoing claim, the foregoing case was paid by reducing KRW 50,00,000 from January 23, 2014.

E. Around January 2014, the Defendant placed an additional order to the Plaintiff for a common lighting fixture at the construction site of this case and received delivery.

F. On July 31, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 20,328,000 (value 18,480,000 value-added tax) to the Defendant, but the Defendant did not file a return.