1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that processes and sells agricultural and livestock products, and the Defendant is a company that operates Smarkets, etc.

B. Around 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of goods with the Defendant’s trademark, design, and form “bat-out” (hereinafter “instant goods supply contract”), and supplied the Defendant with the fat-out meat from 2010 to 2010.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Defendant forced the Plaintiff to dispatch sales workers engaged in the sales of packaging meat supplied by the Defendant to the Plaintiff. In order to continue the transaction with the Defendant, the Plaintiff had employees who entered into an employment contract with the Defendant engage in the sales of packaging meat supplied by the Defendant, etc. In order to maintain the transaction with the Defendant, the Plaintiff paid wages to the said employees. The Defendant’s act committed by the Plaintiff by taking advantage of the superior position in the transaction, and thus, constitutes unfair trade as an coercion of profit under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act, and thus is null and void. The Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to the amount of wages paid to the employees engaged in the sales business without any legal ground, and the Defendant obtained profit equivalent to the above amount of wages. The Defendant was obligated to refund the Plaintiff’s 42,830,700 won (=650,700 won), which is part of the Plaintiff’s wages, 2006 wage 29,180,000 won, and delay damages for the payment from the Plaintiff.