1. All plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties is a company that engages in the manufacture and sale of liquid milk and other dairy products. The Plaintiffs concluded a commodity supply transaction agreement with the Defendant and run each agency during each operation period indicated in the column of “operating period” at each agency listed in the table below. A regional agency operator who supplied milk-processed products from the Defendant and supplied wholesale and consignment to convenience stores, Schlages, large retailers, etc. in charge.

Plaintiff

The agency operation period A Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q B R from the time of July 2004 to June 2015, 2003 to D T T from the time of March 2002 to the time of April 3, 1991 from the time of April 1 to September 2015, 2007 to the time of May 2002 to the time of HX X X from the time of May 2002 to the time of August 2005 to the time of August 2005 to the time of KAB from the time of December 2003 to the time of June 12, 2003 to the time of LB from the time of January 201 to the time of September 201 to the time of 201 to the time of August 1 to 201 to AB from the time of 201 to the date of September 1, 2002.

B. On October 14, 2013, the Fair Trade Commission’s decision and relevant judgment 1) held that the Defendant forced the agency to purchase 26 items, including sublete, from October 2007 to May 2013 (hereinafter “voluntary purchase”).

(2) The act of coercioning the agency to provide a profit by 50% or more to the agency without prior agreement on the wages of display promotion personnel dispatched to a large distributor from 2008 to July 5, 2013 (hereinafter “instant wage transfer”)

) Recognizing that he had issued a corrective order and penalty surcharge of KRW 12,464,00,000 (the Defendant was subject to a corrective order that prohibits a compulsory purchase by an agency on December 6, 2006 by the Fair Trade Commission.

(2) On January 24, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 120,00,000 for the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s compulsory purchase of this case in Seoul Central District Court 2013 High Court Decision 201Da44666, Dec. 6, 2006; and (b) the judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

3. The defendant is Seoul High Court.