1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the modification or addition of the three parts among the judgment of the first instance as follows. As such, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 4 “The instant case” in Part 11, as “the first instance”;

(b) modify “6” certificates of heading 15 of title 4 with “5”, respectively;

(c)the following shall be added to the last activity of paragraph 8:

[7) In the case where the issue is whether an act of a petroleum selling company, such as the Plaintiff, did not determine the price at the time of the supply of a product, constitutes “an act of offering disadvantage” as prescribed by the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Supreme Court held that “any transaction by the post-settlement method is not based on the prior agreement with the gas stations, and thus, it may be deemed that the transaction conditions were somewhat disadvantageous to the gas stations in the course of establishing or implementing the transaction terms or conditions. However, taking full account of the supply market of petroleum products, the structure and current status of the distribution market, the current status of support of funds and facilities between the oil selling company and the oil stations, the circumstances and process of the post settlement method, the details and probability of disadvantages that may arise to the other party to the transaction, the transaction practices and forms of the relevant industry, and the impact on the general competition order, etc., it cannot be deemed that the establishment or alteration of the transaction terms and conditions, or the disadvantage in the process of implementing

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Du25909 Decided April 25, 2013)

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.