beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a corporation with the purpose of manufacturing and selling metal and related products, such as manufacturing and selling the elevator panel, for which the Plaintiff has collected the powder-type paints, and the Defendant is a corporation with the purpose of manufacturing and distributing paints and garbage manufacturing and selling business, such as manufacturing and supplying the powder-type paints.
B. The Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with the powder-type paint produced by the Defendant. From February 2006 to October 2006, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with “HK-type product” (hereinafter “HK-type product”) and from November 2006 to March 2012, the Defendant supplied “PPPPPPPP7000S H-type product” (hereinafter “instant paint”). The total supply price from around 2009 to around 2012 was KRW 585,627,750.
C. The Plaintiff manufactured the elevator panel that collected the instant paint from the Defendant, and the manufacturing process is first distributed to the elevator panel, and then distributed the instant paint supplied by the Plaintiff as much as possible, and lastly distributed the UV map.
On or around December 24, 2011, the Technology Team of the Technology Institute under the Defendant-affiliated with the instant paint has conducted a water quality test on the instant paint three occasions. On or around March 15, 201, the result was derived that the instant paint is excellent after the heat resistant test provided by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant first test”). On or around March 15, 2012, the result was derived that the instant paint was lowered after the second physical properties test conducted by using the time when the Defendant provided at will (hereinafter “the instant second test”). On or around December 24, 2013, the first physical properties test conducted by the Defendant using the time when the Defendant provided at will was conducted by the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant third physical properties test”). On or around December 24, 2013, the instant paint test did not discriminate between the instant paint and the instant paint.