1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On January 13, 2015, the Plaintiff and Defendant Company’s vehicle acquisition limit and land entry contract 1) The Plaintiff paid from the Defendant Company the acquisition price of KRW 26,00,000 from the Defendant Company to KRW 26,00,000, and the acquisition price of the vehicle is the acquisition price of the vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle acquisition agreement”).

After concluding a contract, on January 20, 2015, the Defendant Company entered into a contract for vehicle investment and management and consignment with the content of leaving the vehicle into the Defendant Company (hereinafter “C”) on January 20, 2015. (2) In accordance with a special agreement on the acquisition of the instant vehicle, the Defendant Company entered the terms of having the Plaintiff take charge of the distribution transport of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) and paying monthly transportation fee of KRW 2,70,000.

B. On January 13, 2015, the Defendant Company C and C entered into a cargo category service contract with the content that the Defendant Company delivers the goods requested by C. The main contents are as follows.

Article 3 (Delivery Delivery)

2. The purpose of delivery is to deliver goods requested by C to a place requested by customers;

Article 5 (Disposal of Goods Distribution Expenses)

1. A ton of a train shall be used for business purposes, and in principle, a regular vehicle shall be subsequently changed after inserting it during the period of preparation, and the transportation expenses shall be calculated separately from value-added tax of KRW 2.8 million per month;

(b)

4. C shall request the Defendant Company to have one ton of a ton tower, and the Defendant Company shall enter the vehicle upon C’s request for an increase in the vehicle.

C. Since August 15, 2015, the Plaintiff is not in charge of C’s delivery business.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff Company’s assertion that the parties concerned were not able to take charge of C’s logistics transport in violation of the special terms and conditions under the instant vehicle acquisition agreement.

Therefore, the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 47,250,00,000, and transport charges that can be collected until January 20, 2017 under the instant vehicle acquisition agreement.