A. Basic facts 1) The Plaintiff, from October 2003, agreed to receive a discount on online sales commission in the event that the Defendant and the Plaintiff engage in stock transactions using the Defendant’s online sales system (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(2) From July 201 to December 7, 2011, the Plaintiff, using the Defendant’s electronic order devices, traded 200 option connection transaction (from 17:0 to 05:00 on the following day, from 17:00 to 05:00 on the day after the termination of the contract) and entered into an online transaction. (2) The Plaintiff received orders on September 2, 201 and September 6, 201, and October 28, 201, each order was received, but the details of the order did not appear to have been reflected in the balance of goods after considerable time compared to the actual time of the contract.

(3) In calculating the Defendant’s “amount of profit and loss of the goods held” on the Defendant’s system, the actual purchase price is not calculated by comparing the actual purchase price and the value at the time, but rather, by applying the closing price on the day before the actual purchase price, the “an error related to the profit and loss of the transaction” was found by applying the closing price on the day before the actual purchase price.

4) The Defendant did not promptly grasp the above errors and did not make a separate announcement on the disability.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 5, Gap 6, Gap 8, Gap 15, Gap 16, Gap 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

B. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is deemed that the Defendant was unable to perform its duty in accordance with the terms and conditions of the instant contract, as seen above, that problems such as delayed errors such as details of orders or sales profit and loss related to the transaction profit and loss have continuously occurred, and the information and announcement

Therefore, the defendant shall, barring special circumstances, make the plaintiff.