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

A. The Plaintiff is a company that engages in wholesale and retail business of agricultural products, fishery products, livestock products, etc., and Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a company that engages in food manufacturing and processing business, food distribution business, and trade business established by Defendant B on November 26, 2014.

B. From March 2014 to September 2014, the Plaintiff supplied food materials equivalent to KRW 467,427,464 in total to C (hereinafter “C”) and did not receive KRW 290,403,546 out of the price.

C. Accordingly, on November 19, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the purchase of goods (Seoul Eastern District Court 2014Gahap110431) against C, and was rendered a favorable judgment on January 21, 2015 that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 290,403,546, and damages for delay,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

The plaintiff is partly repaid through a compulsory execution with the title of execution, and the price of the goods that have not been received at present is KRW 233,992,450.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of whole pleadings

2. The defendant company claiming the plaintiff's assertion is one company established by the defendant B, the actual representative of C, for the purpose of evading the payment of goods to the plaintiff, and is substantially the same as C, and is merely the defendant B's private company behind the legal personality.

Therefore, the defendants are jointly obligated to pay C the unpaid goods price of KRW 233,92,450 and delay damages to the plaintiff in accordance with the legal principles on the theory on the denial of legal personality or the theory on the abuse of legal personality.

3. Determination

A. If an existing company of relevant legal principles establishes a new company substantially identical in its form and content for the purpose of evading obligations, the establishment of a new company has abused the company system in order to achieve illegal purpose, such as evading obligations of the existing company. Therefore, the assertion that two companies have a separate legal personality against the creditors of the existing company is a principle of good faith.