1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, or as stated in the reasoning of the first instance court’s judgment, except for adding the following to the tenth one of the 10th decision of the first instance court, the following is the same as the part of the reasoning of the first instance court’s judgment. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the text

2. Parts in height:

A. Each “Agreement on February 23, 2010,” respectively, in the seventh and seventh sentence of the judgment of the first instance, is deemed to be “Agreement on February 25, 2010,” the “Agreement on February 23, 2010,” the “Agreement on February 25, 2010,” the “Agreement on February 23, 2010,” the “Agreement on February 25, 2010,” the “final Annex” in the nine second sentence is deemed to be “final Annex,” and the “Agreement on the Supply of Products of February 23, 2009” in the third sentence of the 10th sentence is deemed to be “Agreement on the Supply of Products of February 23, 209,” respectively.

3. The addition 3) As to this, at the time of the agreement annexed to the Plaintiff on February 25, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of products with B on December 23, 2009 (hereinafter “the first supply contract”).

Inasmuch as the grounds for termination under Articles 8 and 11(2)1 were not known, the Plaintiff did not waive the exercise of the right to terminate or agree not to exercise the right to terminate.

On February 25, 2010, the following facts are acknowledged by the initial supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, the agreement attached to the Plaintiff on February 25, 2010, the circumstances of the latter, the Eul evidence Nos. 9, Eul evidence Nos. 11 and 12, and the witness F’s testimony and the entire purport of the oral argument. In other words, the following facts were revealed: (i) B was unable to timely produce products over several times prior to the agreement on February 25, 2010; (ii) the F, which was the representative director of the Plaintiff at the time, was located in a position where the Plaintiff was well able to know the circumstances of B, such as establishing the Plaintiff while engaging in the original business of B; and (iii) the F was a very low call for these low parts that supplied “B” to the representative director G on January 22, 2010.