A. The Plaintiff is running construction machinery rental business, etc. with the trade name B.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a heavy equipment rental contract with the Defendant’s C, representing the Defendant, and from May 23, 2013, the same year.

7. 8. Between August, the Defendant leased heavy equipment at the construction site in the sports park E in the Jeonbuk-gun, a building site in which the Defendant had been constructed with a subcontract from the Heading-gun, and the cost of using heavy equipment is KRW 21,615,00.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number), witness D's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from December 20, 2013 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint, to the day of full payment.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts to the effect that the defendant entrusted F with the authority to conclude a rental contract of heavy equipment to F, who signed a lessee as a field manager on the same mid-term bulletin (Evidence A No. 1-1-11). Thus, the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's request. However, even if F was not entrusted with the authority to conclude a rental contract of heavy equipment from the defendant, as acknowledged earlier, as long as F concluded a rental contract of heavy equipment between D and D on behalf of the defendant and leased heavy equipment, the defendant is liable to pay the cost of use. Thus, the above argument is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.