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. On June 20, 2012, the Defendant entered into a contract with C, who operates “B”, with the content that, if the Defendant supplies raw materials made of synthetic fibres to C, C would have concluded a contract with the effect that, by installing a divers and increasing the cost of death being supplied as above, C would have to pay the commission after the work (hereinafter “instant contract”).
The main contents are as follows:
A of the contract for the performance of a contract: B of the contract for the performance of a contract: The relationship between the performance of a contract and the
1. On the other hand, Gap promises to enter into an annual contract with Eul to set up the 288th annual fraud 15th and 256 fourth facilities.
2.(1)A will supply to B a timely yarn so that annual work can be carried out smoothly.
(2) Eul shall receive an original supply to Gap, and then deliver it after the work of a tobacco shed.
(3) With respect to the annual fraud 288 288 15 256 4 256 4 , Eul shall work with only the original yarn supplied by Gap.
(4) From August 2012 to August 2017, when normal operation after the annual fraud, A shall allow annual fraud to be operated in a normal manner. If the annual studios of B are fixed due to the circumstances of A, A shall pay the studio to B.
(5) The unit price for annual feed shall be 50D, 75D, and 135D, as of June 2012, the unit price for annual feed shall be the unit price paid to other company from the refined Island as of the relevant date.
B. From October 2012, the Defendant supplied the prime contractor to C, and C used the prime contractor’s work, and then supplied the prime contractor who completed the work to the Defendant.
C. After that, the number of annual work by the Defendant and C has decreased, and the transaction became extinct from July 2013, and C became the result thereof, which led to the failure to operate the annual work.
Since then C closed the business on May 31, 2014.
E. On September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff is KRW 350 million out of the fixed fee claim 1,285,712,169, which he/she holds against the Defendant pursuant to Article 2(4) of the instant contract by failing to operate a tobacco fraud.