1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

(b) there is no difficulty to adopt it as a model for use unless there is anything wrong;

2. The Defendant’s employees B, who were no less than when viewed as the result of the Plaintiff’s analysis, sent to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff, during the last half of the year of the year of the 2009 eldiflass purchase scheme (A No. 10) around September 2009, the Plaintiff completed the construction of one set of luxin factory around 2009, the Plaintiff started to work as a luxal factory from October 2009, and began to work as a luxal factory from December 2009 to December 2009.

4) On November 11, 2009, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the ELD Plas had a meeting consisting of the Plaintiff’s final report on the development of glass tubes at the Plaintiff’s Tynsan factory, coordination of the procedures, the present status of the production of gyd plant, and witness of production facilities. The meeting minutes (Evidence A 1-1-1) prepared by the Plaintiff are recorded as follows. The Plaintiff’s employee D sent the above meeting minutes to the Defendant, ELD Plas on November 12, 2009 by e-mail. On November 16, 2009. On the proceeding list* V6 project - the Plaintiff’s sampling 2 Defendant - On November 16, 2009, the Plaintiff submitted the design inspection to the Defendant on November 30, 2009 - the reliability of the sampling project - Defendant 2’s sample from the first 25th of the design inspection to the Defendant on December 25, 2009.

G. From November 2009 to May 201, 2010, the Plaintiff’s production of sampling to the Defendant, and the Defendant, on December 2, 2009, a meeting consisting of the Defendant and ELDlas’s result of the meeting on November 27, 2009. The minutes of the meeting (Evidence A 12) prepared by the Plaintiff, include the following: Defendant & ELD display result (Evidence A27, 2009)

2. ELDER’s Opinion - OLE.