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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On October 2014, the Plaintiff’s occurrence of the breakdowns occurred while reproducing music stored in the SD Card (hereinafter “instant storage device”) connected to Defendant’s mobile phones (hereinafter “instant storage device”).

B. On October 18, 2014, the Plaintiff’s father: (a) visited the Defendant’s Service Center to repair the above breakdown; (b) requested repair; and (c) C, a repair engineer, separated the storage device of this case from the above device in order to find out the cause of the breakdown; and (d) assembled the device, but did not find the cause of the malfunction; (b) the Plaintiff’s father removed the storage device of this case from the device, and returned it to B.

C. B discovered that data, such as music and photographs, stored in the instant storage device, was lost after the aforementioned repair, and subsequently visited the service center on October 20, 2014, and resisted to C, and attempted to connect C with other devices, but did not read the data, but operated normally by linking other storage devices to the Plaintiff’s device.

Accordingly, C notified B of the fact that the above device was defective in the circumstances or in the storage device of this case.

B visited the Service Center again on October 25, 2014, and the head of the Defendant D team replaced the keyboard of the above device, and then attempted to recover data by sending the storage device to the Barun Electronic Co., Ltd., which is anticipated to be the manufacture of the storage device of this case, but failed.

E. On January 8, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) visited the Defendant’s Service Center that all of the music files (MP3) were recovered from the aforementioned device; (b) was confirmed by the repair engineer; and (c) was returned from the Defendant on June 25, 2015.

Grounds for recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 11.