선급금등 반환
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company that engages in the distribution and sales business of electronic parts, the development of software, etc., and the Defendant is a company that manufactures and sells semiconductor elements, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and core parts.
B. On August 31, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for a business of providing KRW 250 million in return for the transfer of encrypted semiconductor products, technical information, trade secrets, etc. related thereto, and transfers the amount of KRW 2,417,500 per month to the Defendant’s wife K’s account recorded as the Defendant’s internal director (the amount of tax deduction from KRW 2.5 million). The Defendant’s actual operator requested D to develop the products of “L” which improved the performance of H products with the Defendant’s card (one million won per month limit), and transferred the amount of KRW 3,384,500 per month to the K’s account from January 2013 to KRW 3,384,50 (the amount of tax deduction from KRW 3.5 million), and the Plaintiff’s full-time business operator received KRW 2,500,000 from KRW 50,000,000,000 as the Plaintiff’s research income and KRW 2501.
C. In 2013, the Plaintiff was selected as a participating company of the “C Development Project” under the supervision of the Korea Semiconductor Industry Association, and the government subsidized KRW 60,000,000 from the government, and performed the government’s tasks related thereto. In 2014, the Plaintiff was selected as a participating company of the “C Development Project” (hereinafter “instant Development Project”) under the supervision of the said Association, and was notified that it is excluded from the selected company due to the high ratio of debt in the financial statements.
As the Plaintiff was excluded from the participating enterprise of the instant development project, the Plaintiff decided to participate in the instant development project in the name of the Defendant, which was temporarily closed between D and D around June 2014, and the Defendant’s suspension of business is resolved.