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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On November 27, 2008, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for electric use of the Defendant’s building located in the original city B (hereinafter “instant building”), and around that time, the electric use contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

B. From December 2017 to February 2018, the Defendant did not pay the electricity fee of KRW 1,050,470 (i.e., KRW 297,220 on December 2017, KRW 35,910 on February 35, 2018, KRW 417,340 on February 22, 2018). The said electricity use contract was terminated on February 22, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the sum of the electricity fee of KRW 1,050,470 and the delay damages therefrom, unless there are special circumstances to the contrary.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant filed a report on the closure of business on December 2008, and the instant building transferred its ownership to another person through the auction procedure, and thus, the Defendant did not have an obligation to pay the said electricity usage fee.

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant had been dissolved and liquidation procedures under the Commercial Act up to now, and therefore, the Defendant cannot be exempted from the obligation to pay the electric utility fee solely on the ground that the Defendant reported the closure of business.

This part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

In addition, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded an electric use contract on November 27, 2008 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no evidence to deem that the parties to the said electric use contract were changed, and the Defendant also recognized that there was no fact of notifying the Plaintiff of the change of customer name or of notifying the termination of the contract.

If the party to the above electricity use contract was the defendant, the ownership of the building was changed.

A person who actually uses electricity can not be exempted from the obligation to pay electricity user fees solely on the ground that he/she is a person who actually uses electricity.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.