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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

The Plaintiff is a business operator of “C” of a personal business entity that runs the retail business of medical appliances, etc. opened on July 16, 2013, and the Plaintiff’s F has been engaged in the transaction of selling medical appliances in the name of “C”.

F purchased a medical device from the Defendant under the name of “C” on January 22, 2015, and settled KRW 2,574,000 with a card. At that time, F signed the card description “G” (the F appears to be an employee of “C” and used externally at the time of engaging in medical device business.

Around May 4, 2015, the Defendant supplied Mag-gu 1 and Mag-dong 1 (hereinafter “instant goods”) to H Medical Center (hereinafter “C”). At the time, the Defendant issued a business registration certificate of “C” from the said employees, and issued an electronic tax invoice of KRW 5,830,000 (including value-added tax) in total, for the proceeds from supply of the instant goods to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “C”) on November 2, 2015.

On August 8, 2018, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of the above goods, and this Court rendered a decision to grant payment of KRW 5,830,00 to the Defendant with interest of KRW 6% per annum from November 3, 2015 to the delivery date of a duplicate of the above complaint, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment (2018Gada9702) to the Defendant, which became final and conclusive on August 25, 2018.

【As a result of the fact-finding on the Hmedical Center of this Court, the Plaintiff is the business title of “C” and the actual operator of “C” was the Plaintiff’s child F. However, from March 2015, F was changed from around May 2017 to “C”, and F was an employee of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), and the instant goods supply contract was concluded in the name of “C,” and the relevant goods purchase party is D, and the Defendant also is the party to the contract.