A. E, with the trade name of “D”, who operated wholesale and retail business of the main body, etc., entered into a supply contract for the main body, etc. (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) with Defendant C who operated the clothing manufacturing business under the trade name of “F” and began to supply the main body, etc. to Defendant C according to the instant supply contract.

B. On December 24, 2009, after the Plaintiff was established for the purpose of wholesale and retail business of the nuclear power plant, etc., the Plaintiff acquired the status of a supplier under the supply contract of this case from E, and the Plaintiff continued to supply the nuclear power plant to Defendant C pursuant to the supply contract of this case.

C. Around December 31, 2009, Defendant C signed and sealed a written confirmation of credit balance stating that the supply price of the atomics, etc. not paid at the time of December 31, 2009 reaches KRW 1,219,911,065 with the trade name “F”. D.

On April 6, 2010, Defendant C established the Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) for the purpose of the clothing manufacturing business by investing in the business of his own clothes manufacturing business, etc., and then the Defendant Company received supply of clothing, etc. from the Plaintiff in accordance with the instant supply contract.

E. Around December 31, 2010, Defendant C, the representative director of the Defendant Company, signed a written confirmation of credit balance with the purport that the supply price of the original part, etc., which was not paid to the Plaintiff at the time of December 31, 2010, reaches KRW 1,592,202,615, on an individual qualification.

F. The supply price of an original unit, etc. that the Plaintiff was not paid after May 16, 2017 reaches KRW 1,316,197,375.

[Ground of recognition] The items in Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 2-1 through 4, 3-1, 2, 4, 5-1 through 3, and 6-1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the plaintiff's cause of action, the defendant company continued to use the trade name of the defendant C after receiving an investment in the business of the defendant C's clothes manufacturing business, etc.