1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The seven mobile communications sellers including the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiffs, etc.”) established the Defendant around January 30, 2008, and entered into an agreement on the consignment sale of mobile phones with the Defendant while maintaining the status of shareholders and executive officers.

The Defendant entered into a consignment agency contract with the mobile communications company such as KNF. According to the consignment agency contract, when the Defendant pays the mobile phone price supplied by the mobile communications company after reducing the credit date, the Defendant could obtain the benefits that can be discounted or paid as much as the amount applying a certain discount rate (14.6% per annum from January 2010 to May 2012, 201, and 12% per annum from June 2012) to the reduced number of days.

However, the reason why the plaintiff et al. was established is to realize the economy of the size and to individually settle the case, so the defendant should individually settle the discounted amount from the mobile communication company as a result of the plaintiff et al.'s payment of the mobile phone price lower than the credit date.

The Plaintiff’s early payment of the mobile phone price to the Defendant’s settlement of discount amount is KRW 57,859,607 from January 2, 2010 to January 2014, and damages for delay are KRW 11,407,540 in total.

On the other hand, on April 10, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to withdraw from the Defendant, but the Plaintiff did not waive its claim for the said discounted settlement at the time of the said agreement.

In addition, there is no penalty liability for the failure to meet the monthly sales target to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff the discounted settlement amount of KRW 69,267,147 (=57,859,607 KRW 11,407,540) and delay damages for KRW 57,859,607.

B. The defendant paid the mobile phone price to the plaintiff et al. after shortening the extension date.