1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff Company produced and sold C and D (hereinafter “the instant product”) which is a natural byproduct products used for agriculture using deep sea water as a raw material. Around April 2016, the Defendant Company decided to establish a legal entity and establish a legal entity by proposing that the representative of the Defendant Company E establish a legal entity with F and proposing that the business be defective.

E transferred the investment amount of KRW 20,000,000 to G with the incorporation fund on April 20, 2016, to G, thereby establishing the Plaintiff Company, and the Defendant came to hold 20% of the Plaintiff Company’s shares.

Around April 2016, the Defendant agreed to supply the instant product to the Plaintiff with a monopoly (hereinafter “instant exclusive sales contract”), and the Plaintiff, while directly accompanying the domestic and Chinese land for about six months, carried out a test cultivation and secured approximately KRW 500 video data.

The plaintiff agreed with H to carry out an agency contract for the product of this case, and actually entered into an agency contract with the international trading company of China.

On November 2016, the defendant requested the plaintiff to request the data on the test-producing images owned by the plaintiff and sent them to the defendant.

However, on November 14, 2016, the Defendant notified the termination of the exclusive sales contract of this case with repayment of KRW 20,000,000 as investments made by the Plaintiff and KRW 13,00,000 as products supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant.

The Defendant unilaterally reversed the exclusive sales contract of this case without any justifiable reason. Accordingly, the Plaintiff sustained damages of KRW 34,967,506 in total equivalent to the test cultivation, production of related data, and public relations expenses incurred in relation to the product of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff the above damages amounting to KRW 34,967,506 and damages for delay.

B. Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with goods equivalent to KRW 12,828,200 from May 2016 to October of the same year, but the Plaintiff.