The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that engages in wholesale and retail business of industrial materials, and the Defendant is a person who holds a patent for pipe lamps, which is a semiconductor component.

B. On May 2019, the Defendant: (a) the Plaintiff’s auditor and the Plaintiff’s business, who were employed in early May 2, 2019, requested the Plaintiff to produce 500 c lamps products via a private person C; and (b) the Plaintiff produced and supplied c lamps 500 products (hereinafter “instant products”) by paying KRW 12,838,100 to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff made and supplied the instant product at the Defendant’s request. The Plaintiff leased KRW 3,500,000, total amount of KRW 2,000,000 on March 28, 2019 and KRW 1,000,000 on April 22, 2019, and KRW 3,500,000 on June 30, 2019. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages equivalent to the manufacturing cost of the instant product, total of KRW 12,838,100, and KRW 3,50,000, total of KRW 16,338,100 and KRW 3,500,00.

2) The product of this case produced by the Defendant was aware of this fact, not for sale, but for publicity, and the manufacture and sale of the product of this case are entirely responsible for the Plaintiff. Thus, the Defendant was not obligated to pay the amount equivalent to the manufacturing cost of the product of this case. The Defendant did not borrow KRW 3,500,000 from the Plaintiff.

In addition, the Defendant violated the contract with the Defendant by selling the instant product at a low price without the Defendant’s consent and requesting the production of additional products on a voluntary basis. Accordingly, the Defendant incurred damages equivalent to KRW 30,676,451, such as wages, actual expenses, royalties, research and development expenses, and thus, the Defendant cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request.

B. 1) In full view of the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to manufacture the instant product, even though having requested the Plaintiff to do so.