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 Defendant was introduced by Nonparty B, around December 2012, as a company that produces and sells public works machinery and various industrial equipment, that has diversified export areas that were concentrated on Japan, and has been working in the field of petroleum drilling industry through Nonparty B while making efforts to diversify export products.
The plaintiff revealed that the representative director of the defendant was a professional know-how and beer in the business related to petroleum drilling equipment, and suggested the production and export of petroleum drilling equipment.
B. On January 14, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a new business development agreement with the Defendant with the content that “the Plaintiff has served for a considerable period of time in the industry of petroleum and gas drilling equipment, as well as the Defendant’s new business (a brand development and name, market development, export) successful settlement of related equipment in the U.S. market, by utilizing the experience that the Plaintiff had served for a considerable period of time in the industry of petroleum and gas drilling equipment, and the know-how and connection in the sale of related equipment in the U.S. market, and that “the Plaintiff shall take charge of domestic and foreign business of drilling equipment for the period from January 14, 2013 to December 12, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed to receive 7,000,000 won per month as service fees (ar fees) and agreed to receive incentives based on sales or profits after mutual consultation.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant consulting contract”). (c)
In May 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the instant consulting contract with the purport that “the Defendant became unable to trust the Plaintiff any more due to any improper act shown by the Plaintiff while consulting on the development of the new business, and accordingly, the development of the new business would not achieve the objective of the Plaintiff, and accordingly, would terminate the instant consulting contract as of May 22, 2013 (hereinafter “instant notification of termination of the contract”),” and the notification thereof to the Plaintiff around May 28, 2013.