1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, established for the purpose of assembling and manufacturing electronic parts, etc., processed and supplied to the Defendant (attached Form 1) mobile phone parts equivalent to KRW 5,167,807,807,205, total amount of KRW 5,495,418,515 (= KRW 327,611, KRW 310, KRW 5,167,807,807,207,205) around April 201 to December 12, 2014; and issued a tax invoice on the relevant price.

B. The aforementioned mobile phone parts are ① the Plaintiff, a third collaborative company, supplied the Defendant, a second collaborative company, with precision processing, such as parts strawing, and ② the Defendant supplied the parts processed by the third collaborative company, such as the Plaintiff, to C, a primary collaborative company, and supplied them to C, a primary collaborative company. ③ The Plaintiff, etc. supplied them to D Co., Ltd., a client.

The plaintiff and the defendant are not so-called supply volume of the plaintiff, but a method of calculating the price based on the sales volume of the defendant's primary subcontractor.

In other words, it is a method based on the quantity of the remaining parts, excluding the parts determined by the defendant as inferior goods and the parts determined by the primary subcontractor as inferior goods.

The plaintiff argued to the effect that there was no agreement on the settlement of accounts to be applied to the original flexible method, but did not dispute the fact that the subsequent argument was changed and the price was settled by the method of the reduction with the defendant.

(No. 3th page of the legal brief dated June 19, 2018). If the plaintiff issues a tax invoice accordingly, the defendant traded it by settling the payment on a monthly basis.

C. On September 8, 2015, the Plaintiff suspended the production and supply of part of the parts, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on September 8, 2015, that it clarified the reasons for the discontinuance of production and the countermeasures for the recurrence of the future issues.

Plaintiff

The representative director E shall have the right to operate the company and machinery around that time due to the aggravation of the financial situation of the company.