The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Upon receiving a request from C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) to produce films to be used in TV display (hereinafter “the film of this case”), the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to process the film of this case after the film of this case (hereinafter “the film of this case”) around June 3, 2019.

B. On July 22, 2019, the Defendant supplied the instant film to C.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 11,00,000 to the Defendant on July 11, 2019, and KRW 31,944,000 to the Defendant on July 31, 2019.

C On September 9, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a claim for damages on the ground that the horse phenomenon occurred in the film of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 3, 6 evidence, Eul 6 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant used this paper (a square paper 100gm2/m2) used by the Plaintiff’s existing business partners, but the Plaintiff produced and changed the film of this case by lowering the impact of contact with each other.

However, in order to reduce cost, the Defendant produced the film of this case by using a lux 90g/m2, which is less than the standard (100g/m2) in a lux 90g/m2.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff sustained damages of KRW 136,748,110, total amount of KRW 62,464,00, and KRW 10,108,110, warehouse expenses, KRW 1,200,00, and KRW 62,976,00, and KRW 136,748,110, which were returned by C, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff.

B. In full view of the following facts and circumstances that can be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the descriptions of evidence Nos. 3, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8 and the overall purport of the arguments, the judgment below revealed that the Defendant used a plosinary document or image, which is lower than that of the Plaintiff, or that the Defendant used a plosinary document than that of the Plaintiff, or that the plosinary phenomenon was caused by the plosinary paper used by the Defendant.

It is insufficient to recognize.

Therefore, we cannot accept the plaintiff's above argument.

1) The Defendant, around June 3, 2019, shall process the point back of the film back of the instant case from the Plaintiff.