1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

(2) On November 27, 2017, the Defendant sent the following e-mail to the Plaintiff, which is premised on the ordered quantity stated in the e-mail as of November 13, 2017, and the Plaintiff also ordered additional production based on the ordered quantity.

On November 30, 2017, the Defendant’s e-mail delivery was completed with HC FAO delivery on the 30th of November, 2017, and on November 30 of HC MTC 8,000EA delivery standard, 2640EA (PEL standard) is supplied.

At the time of reflection of the plan in December 12, 198, the HC only reflected in the HC MTC and the HCFC supply completion date, HC 8,00EA supply standard is deficient or deficient -5,400EA plan reflects the plan.

“The Plaintiff’s e-mail content as of November 27, 2017, i.e., the 12-month order quantity scenarios, reference time, and read the following e-mail content of the Defendant’s e-mail on November 27, 2017.

It seems that more additional production plans should be added.

The increase in the corporate plan and the poor rate are high, so the required amount has increased.

* Contents - The planning quantity of customer companies in the HCR 1 month: 5,700 EA receipt - The transportation period should be sent from 12th month to 12th month, and the HC panel supply quantity in November 11 need to establish an additional production plan, in which there is no inventory because the entire quantity was sent by AIR.

The Defendant transferred gold and papering to the Plaintiff in the order from November 13, 2017 to February 20, 2018. The transfer of gold and papering to the Plaintiff refers to no longer supply of goods using the gold and papering, which is consistent with the Defendant’s argument that the supply amount would be gradually reduced. (b) The Plaintiff is in accordance with the Defendant’s argument that the estimated order form and papering order form and papering order form and the record of storage (in preparation for the supply amount, the supply amount claimed by the Plaintiff is calculated, but the supply amount claimed by the Plaintiff does not mean the entire quantity supplied by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, but is limited to the quantity passed through the Plaintiff’s defect inspection.

There is a defect in the plaintiff.