The defendant shall be jointly and severally and severally liable to the plaintiff A to KRW 24,37,250.

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was from October 2012 to September 30, 2013 that the Plaintiff supplied to A, and the Plaintiff did not receive KRW 24,337,250 from the price.

A, when the land and buildings, which are the business places of Gohap, run by it, have been sold to others at a voluntary auction on or around May 2014, A sold to the Defendant various facilities, such as the contact equipment, and the Defendant operated the joint marketing processing company in the name of F in the Ssung City.

The defendant, at the time, took over the human and physical organization of the C operated by A, including the employment of A as an employee, as well as the Ober, forkin, and telephone number used by A, while using F as the main part of the trade name was the same as A.

Therefore, as a transferee of business who continues to use the trade name, the defendant is responsible for repaying the outstanding amount as well as A pursuant to Article 42(1) of the Commercial Act.

B. There is no dispute between the parties to the judgment, or comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, it is recognized that the plaintiff did not receive the payment, even though the plaintiff supplied the above 24,37,250 won to C operated by the plaintiff.

Furthermore, we examine the defendant's transfer of business and mutual continued use of business.

The issue of whether a transfer of business can be viewed as a transfer of business should be determined depending on whether the transferee continues to engage in the same business activity as the transferor performed after the transferee transferred functional assets as the source of revenue organized.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da602, Jul. 22, 2005; 2007Da89722, Apr. 11, 2008). Furthermore, the continued use of a trade name as referred to in Article 42(1) of the Commercial Act does not require the same between the trade name used by the transferor and the trade name used by the transferee. However, there is no need for a continuous use to the extent that the trade name used by the transferor and the trade name used by