1. The defendant's appeal and the request for return of provisional payment are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be applied for the return of the provisional payment.

1. The reasoning of the lower court’s acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is as follows, and thus, it is identical to the description of the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for modification and addition as follows. Thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the

The 11th Amendment to the 2nd sentence of the judgment of the first instance shall be made to the 201st sentence "Seoul around June 2012".

The 3rd page 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be amended to "Witness G" of the court of first instance.

After the judgment of the court of first instance on the three pages 1 of the first instance, “There is no obligation to pay the above goods, even if the Defendant had the obligation to pay the above goods, the said obligation to pay the goods has expired after the three-year extinctive prescription.”

The first instance court’s 6th page D shall be amended to read “NE” as “NEA” (the evidence submitted by the Defendant, including the statement No. 13-1 of the evidence submitted by the Defendant, is difficult to reverse it).

After the 7th sentence of the first instance judgment, the 11th sentence "I cannot sell" is revised as "(However, it takes considerable time until the defendant acquired the right to sell E brands across the country, returned each region's ticket from the existing E brand business office, and recovered E brand products stored in the above business office)."

The "Witness G" of the 8th half of the judgment of the first instance shall be amended to "Witness G of the first instance court".

The following judgments shall be added to 4 pages 9 of the first instance judgment:

C. Even if the Defendant had the obligation to pay the goods to the Defendant for the original quantity of this case, the Defendant asserted that the three-year extinctive prescription has expired, but the above claim for the goods has expired. However, the above evidence and the evidence Nos. 1 and 9 included the overall purport of the pleadings and the following circumstances, namely, there was a continuous supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant for the products such as E brand's visiting knobity and domination, and the Defendant has settled part of the price for the goods that were not paid to the Plaintiff at the end of each month.