1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 6,622,020 for the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from August 20, 2014 to May 1, 2015; and (b) May 2, 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 7, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Korean Intellectual Property Office for utility model registration with respect to “C” (hereinafter “C”) and is an individual entrepreneur who distributes the said products in the name of “D.” The Defendant is an individual entrepreneur who manufactures cosmetics, wholesale and retail business, etc. under the trade name of “E.”

B. Around January 2014, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to supply C products, provided the packaging design of the said products to the Defendant on or around April 2014, and remitted KRW 1,045,000 to the Defendant on May 30, 2014.

C. On June 2, 2014, the Plaintiff, on June 2, 2014, carried out a large volume of brush, printed on “(manufacturing and seller) Embrypt F in Pakistan-si in Gyeonggi-do,” and carried out a brush brush to the Defendant factory.

On June 13, 2014, the Plaintiff received 200 goods C from the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 10 evidence, Eul evidence 1 through 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Assertion and determination

A. The parties' assertion that the plaintiff, upon receiving a request from the plaintiff to produce 5,000 C products until July 17, 2014, the defendant promised to produce up to 4,000 products to the maximum extent possible until July 16, 2014, and the plaintiff did not deliver 4,000 products to the plaintiff until July 16, 2014 when the contract was entered into between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, but did not deliver 4,00 products until July 16, 2014, thereby causing damage to the image of the product and caused damage to the product and thereby making the plaintiff not distribute the product. The defendant asserts that the defendant should compensate for the damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the failure to perform the duty to manufacture and supply the product.

In regard to this, the defendant was requested from the plaintiff for the production supply of 200 samples of C products, but the defendant has implemented it.