음식대금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. If the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the evidence evidence No. 2 and evidence No. 1 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim No. 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant and the defendant's employees, who are the subordinate business operators of Sungwon Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter " Sungwon Construction"), have provided credit meals at the "C" restaurant operated by the plaintiff from June 2016 to August 2016, and the amount of credit payment constitutes 5,747,170 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as requested by the plaintiff, from October 26, 2016 to the day of complete payment.
(A) Although the Defendant alleged that D, who signed a confirmation of food costs, was a sex production employee, and some of the food costs was not a meal for the Defendant’s employees, the Defendant’s assertion that D is an employee of the Defendant, and that D is an employee of the Defendant under the written evidence No. 1, the Defendant’s argument that differs from this premise is without merit). 2. The Defendant’s assertion on the premise that the Defendant agreed to receive food costs from a sex production, and that a sex production was responsible for the Defendant’s food costs, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff agreed to receive food costs from a sex production, but there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the part of the evidence No. 2 and evidence No. 1 were written on the part of the evidence No. 2 and No. 1, and there is no other evidence to prove that the Plaintiff consented to the payment of food costs by the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. The decision of the first instance court is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed.