beta
Text
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.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff asserted around June 2012, the Plaintiff found the Defendant’s pesticide sales store in order to purchase the beginning of the instant plastic house with an intention to remove 18,000 knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife in the instant plastic house.
The Plaintiff, an employee of the Defendant, who works at that place, would use a vinyl facility as it is to use the vinyl facility for Saturdays, and furthermore, would be able to remove the plants inside the vinyl facility without cutting the vinyl clothes on the floor, using only the first agents, and seek to use the first agents in such a manner as above, and then spread the first agents in a vinyl, and then seek to find it possible to do so. C sold the first agents of this case to the Plaintiff on the ground that there is no problem in the first agents of this case after the passage of one month, by spraying the “Igra” (hereinafter “the first agents of this case”).
Since then, the Plaintiff believed the above explanation and spreaded the beginning system of this case in the greenhouse of this case, and after the lapse of approximately one month, the Plaintiff stoma was stoved, but 18,000 stoves of the matoma, but did not fully stove the 18,000 matoma.
① The first agents of this case shall not be absolutely used in the cultivation of facilities, such as plastic houses, and ② Furthermore, if the first agents of this case were to spread the first agents of this case under the condition that vinyl is provided on the floor, due to the composition of the first agents of this case remaining in vinyl, it shall not spread the first agents of this case because the remaining ingredients of the first agents of this case were stomatoma, with water remaining in vinyl, and thus, it is unlikely that the second agents of this case may defoliate the first agents of this case. However, even though C might not spread the first agents of this case, it is erroneous for the Plaintiff to explain such cautions and sell the first agents of this case to C, and thus, the Defendant is the Defendant.