beta
Text
1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that operates key telecommunications business as a key telecommunications business operator under the Telecommunications Business Act.
B. In June 1996, the Plaintiff obtained permission from the Minister of Information and Communication for the PC (Person Community Service, hereinafter “PCS”) service from October 1997 with respect to the PC service, which is a 2.5-generation mobile communications service, and provided the IMT 2000 mobile communications service from the Minister of Information and Communication in December 2001 with a license for the IMT 2000 (IMT-200, International Mobcom -2000, hereinafter “IMT 200”), and from December 2003, the Plaintiff provided the IMcheon's commercial service.
C. From August 1, 2009 to November 30, 2010, the Plaintiff paid each money indicated in the “amount of payment” column in attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant payment date”) to the Defendant on the application form for subscription prepared between the customer and the customer as to the use of IMB services, respectively, on the date indicated in the “amount of payment” column in attached Table 1 of the same Table.
(Attached 1 The amount to be entered in the table of claims No. 1 is as follows: (The amount to be entered in the table of claims No. 1 is as follows: the amount entered in the table of claims for August 2009; the amount entered in the table No. 2 is as of September 2009; the amount entered in the table No. 3 is as of October 2009; the amount entered in the table No. 4 is as of November 2009; the amount entered in the table No. 5 is as of December 2009; the amount entered in the table No. 6 is as of January 2010; the amount entered in the table No. 7 as of February 2010; the amount entered in the table No. 8 as of March 3, 2010; the amount entered in the table No. 10 as of May 5, 2010; the amount entered in the table No. 12010, July 12, 2010; and the amount entered in the sequence No.15 1.
On August 9, 2012, the Plaintiff is to the director of the tax office of subdivision.