1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff concluded a supply contract with the Defendant on plastic containers in which cosmetics were contained verbally via Nonparty B (hereinafter “instant products”), and received confirmation from the Defendant’s executives and employees from the consignee of the supply instruction and transaction specifications in accordance with the above contract, and supplied the Defendant with the product equivalent to KRW 91,780,150 (including surtax) in total 19 times from August 2, 2014 to October 22 of the same year. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 91,780,150 and delay damages therefrom.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 9 (including the number of each unit; hereinafter the same shall apply), the plaintiff's provision of the product of this case to the defendant's business establishment, the plaintiff's preparation of a transaction statement against the defendant, and the defendant's employees C, etc. may recognize the fact that the defendant's employees C, etc. signed as underwriters in a part of the transaction statement.

However, each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 8, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings, i.e., ① the plaintiff became aware of the company director B, the representative of the non-party corporation D (hereinafter "non-party corporation") through the introduction of the transaction company, and supplied the product of this case to the defendant's business place directed by Eul after receiving an order for the product of this case directly from the above B, and at that time the defendant was never aware of the fact; ② the above representative of the non-party corporation engaged in manufacturing and wholesale of cosmetics, manufacturing and wholesale of cosmetics, and wholesale retail, etc.; ② the above representative of the non-party corporation is only a person engaged in independent business activities; and not the defendant's employee or the defendant's power of attorney regarding the conclusion of the supply contract of the product of this case; ③ the plaintiff against the non-party corporation on December 31, 2014 as the electronic tax invoice set forth in the "value of supply" as the supply price of the product of this case.