1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

On October 28, 2014, Edward Co., Ltd. is a bankrupt corporation (hereinafter “Bankruptcy Company”) declared bankrupt by Daejeon District Court 2014Hau5011 on October 28, 2014, and the Plaintiff is a person appointed as a bankruptcy trustee of the Bankruptcy Company.

On April 2012, the bankruptcy company entered into a contract for the supply of lighting products (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) with the global coco system (hereinafter “globalco”) located in Japan, which was located in Japan as a result of the Defendant’s brokerage.

At the time of the instant contract, the Defendant guaranteed the payment guarantee (hereinafter “instant payment guarantee contract”) for the unpaid payment claim for the LED lighting transaction from July 1, 2012 to August 31, 2013, among the claim for the price of goods against the global EED company’s bankruptcy.

[Ground for recognition] The plaintiff's assertion in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 (which includes a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) is examined as follows: " insofar as the global Corporation did not pay KRW 673,674,645 out of the claim for the price of goods against the bankrupt company, the defendant shall be liable to pay the plaintiff the above KRW 673,674,645 and the delay damages therefor in accordance with the payment guarantee contract of this case." The payment guarantee contract of this case was made with respect to the claim for the unpaid amount from July 1, 2012 to August 31, 2013 against the global Corporation's bankruptcy. The evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the total amount of the price of the global Corporation's payment in the above period reaches KRW 673,674,645, as asserted by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

(2) Article 163 of the Civil Act provides that “The head of each business partner who submitted the evidence by the Plaintiff shall not specify the details of transactions during the above period, and there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant guaranteed the payment of all the transaction periods between the Plaintiff and the Global Coin as the Plaintiff’s assertion.” Furthermore, the claim for the price of goods against the global Coin bankrupt against the global Coin’s bankruptcy is the price of goods