beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
Plaintiff
C The lawsuit shall be dismissed.
B. The defendant South-North oil industry;
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Defendant Namyang Oil Business Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Namyang Oil Business”) manufactures and sells milk products, beverages, etc., such as starting oil, effective oil, powder oil, and chees, and supplies products to consumers through 1,800 large distribution stores or general retail stores through 18 branches nationwide (based on July 2013) or convenience stores.
The agencies of the defendant Namyang oil industry are classified into powder coffee, coffee, milk, fry, fry, and beverage agencies by item. Among the milk agencies dealing with the effective milk, the market retail agencies are engaged in the wholesale transaction after being supplied with products from the defendant Namyang oil industry and supplying general retail stores for their own account, and at the same time, the "entrusted transaction" is concurrently engaged in the supply of products to the large distribution stores for the defendant Namyang oil industry's account.
Plaintiff
The name agency operation period A G from May 1994 to March 201, 2006 BH on March 2006 to February 2, 2011, CI from May 5, 2005 to December 2, 2013 from DJ on November 1, 1996 to September 2, 201, EK from April 2005 to April 201, 2006 to June 2, 2009.
The plaintiffs entered into an agency contract with the defendant Namyang Oil Business and entered into an agency contract, and provided products from the defendant Namyang Oil Business during each operation period entered in the "Operation Period" column, and conducted wholesale transactions and consignment transactions with each of the agencies listed in the following table.
C. According to the consignment transaction with the Defendant Namyang oil industry, the Plaintiffs supplied the products of the Defendant Namyang oil business to the Defendant Home Plux Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Home Plux”), Home Plux Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Home Plux”), Bar Shopping Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Plux”), and Home Pluxco Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Home Pluxco”).
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 2 and 41 evidence, testimony of witness M of the first instance court, examination results of plaintiff E and F of the first instance court, the purport of the whole pleadings.