A. The Plaintiff is a company established pursuant to the Singapore Act and engaged in the supply of mobile communications-related products, such as mobile phones, and the Defendant is a corporation established pursuant to the laws of the Republic of Korea and has a place of business in the Republic of Korea.

B. On August 5, 2014, the Defendant maintained the Plaintiff’s 5 Lphone 5’s initial defective goods or used goods at the new goods level, and then distributes them to the market again, the price is lower than the new goods, and it is ordinarily determined at lower prices than the second goods.

Model No. 1,00 "FD298 ZA/A" 1,00 (40 c. 600 c. c. f. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c. c

C. On August 12, 2014, the Defendant delivered to the Plaintiff the number 1,00 “FD297KH/A” 1,000 model of the Alphone 5 Elphones (hereinafter “instant delivery goods”).

On October 6, 2014, the Plaintiff sold at USD 280,000 per unit of 280,000 on a product model number 1,000 of FD297K/A (FD297K/A) delivered by the Defendant to the Kring Easy Tecom Limited.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant's judgment on the defense before the merits asserted that the lawsuit of this case was unlawful as a lawsuit filed by a non-party to the lawsuit, because the plaintiff is an individual enterprise and is not a corporation. However, according to the Gap evidence 17-1 and 2, the Singapore's company and the Accounting Regulation Bureau (ACRA) on April 25, 2005 is a company established on February 16, 2005 and issued shares in accordance with Chapter 50 of the Singapore's Company Act.