1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts recognized;

A. The defendant is a company that runs a waste disposal business, and the plaintiff is a person who runs a transportation business.

B. The Defendant, who is a waste discharging company B and C (hereinafter collectively referred to as “B, etc.”), agreed to dispose of waste by being entrusted with the disposal of waste. The Plaintiff transported waste discharged from September 2012 to December 2012 to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, purport of whole pleading

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he received a request from the Defendant for carriage of wastes as above, and sought payment of accrued transportation charges of KRW 81,046,983 (including value-added tax) against the Defendant.

3. Determination

A. First, as to whether the above transportation was carried out at the defendant's request, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 is difficult to believe it as it is, and it is insufficient to recognize it only with Gap evidence Nos. 2-1 through 3, and evidence Nos. 4 through 6, and witness evidence No. 4 and witness evidence No. 4 are found otherwise.

B. In addition, in cases where the Plaintiff, who discharged wastes from B, etc., the Plaintiff, and the Defendant, transported the wastes to the Defendant, the Defendant shall treat them, but the Defendant agreed to receive the sum of waste treatment expenses and transport charges from B, etc. and to pay them to the Plaintiff among them may be acknowledged by witness D’s testimony, or where there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant received the treatment expenses and transport charges from B, etc. during the above period, it is insufficient to deem that the terms of the above contract alone concluded that the Plaintiff agreed to pay the transport charges to the Plaintiff even if the Defendant did not receive the treatment expenses and transport charges from B, etc., and there

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit without further review.

4. Conclusion.