1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, the lower court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, presumed that (1) the contract amount of the call option was USD 600,000 per month, and the contract period was one year, which could not cause substantial loss to the Plaintiff, and (2) the Defendant, upon entering into the instant contract, could have sufficiently known or could have sufficiently known the circumstances that the Plaintiff could incur difficult loss due to failure to secure goods on the settlement date, and (2) a large-scale export contract was entered into with an Indian company in the circumstances where the amount equivalent to 80% of the Plaintiff’s sales amount was disbursed for raw materials imported from abroad as raw materials cost.

On the other hand, there was no reason for the Defendant to subscribe to the currency option product with the terms of “A”, and the Plaintiff was at the location where the import of raw materials would delayed without obtaining approval from the Defendant for the issuance of the import letter of credit and would not be able to perform the export contract as scheduled, and it appears that the Plaintiff could not refuse to invite the Defendant to subscribe to the KIKO product that was made in line with approval for the issuance of the import letter of credit. The Plaintiff appears to have been well aware of these circumstances. (3) Nevertheless, the Defendant actively solicited the Plaintiff, emphasizing the need for exchange hedging on the amount of export contract with the above Indian State, and did not explain the risks of the instant currency option contract to the Plaintiff clearly, and (3) recognized that the Defendant did not explain the Plaintiff on the risks of the instant currency option contract in the process of solicitation so that the Plaintiff could not clearly recognize the risks of the instant currency option contract.

The ground of appeal disputing the fact-finding among the judgment of the court below is practically the fact-finding court.