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

A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in fiber salting business, and the Defendant is a person who manufactures and sells fiber washing agents, etc. with the trade name of “B”.

B. Around April 2015, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with refined B-100 products (hereinafter “instant products”) from heading agents B-100 products (around April 2015, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant products”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 5, 6, 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant would be supplied with refining agents whose principal ingredient content is about 30%, and as a result, the products of this case supplied by the Defendant were found to be merely about 9% of the principal ingredient concentration. The products of this case were confirmed to have been added to bium (Na) ingredients and bium ingredients that may cause the inferior chromosity, even if they were added to salt (Na) ingredients.

The plaintiff suffered damages due to the fact that he was supplied with the product of this case including the product of this case, whose principal ingredients are less than or not entered, and thus, he was pointed out by the customer and the contract was reversed.

Therefore, since the product of this case supplied by the defendant to the plaintiff is a defective product, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for the damages suffered by the plaintiff.

B. The following circumstances are revealed in full view of the following: Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 7 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

① The Plaintiff agreed to be supplied with the main ingredient content of which is about 30% by the Defendant, and the product of this case claimed that the main ingredient content is about 9%. However, there is no evidence to confirm that the Defendant decided to supply the main ingredient content is about 30%, and therefore, the main ingredient concentration of the main ingredient in this case is about 30%.