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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the defendant supplied ready-mixed equivalent to KRW 16,302,00 to extend the factory site of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "C") constructed by the defendant at the request of the defendant's employee or agent B, and that the defendant sought payment of the above ready-mixed price against the defendant.

B. Therefore, according to the health stand, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 as to whether Eul requested the plaintiff as the defendant's employee or representative, it is acknowledged that the defendant is carrying on construction business under the name of "D" and the name of "D" is included in the name of "D," but it is difficult to deem that the name of "D" only can be stated as requested by the manufacturer, and the accuracy of the entries such as the affiliated position is guaranteed by the name itself. Meanwhile, the following circumstances such as the Gap's statement Nos. 1 through 5 and 7 and the testimony of the witness E at the trial, which can show the purport of the whole oral argument, i.e., the representative director Eul who attempted to extend the factory site, entered the "B" as the defendant's representative director at the time of signing the contract with "B" on April 15, 2013, and entered the contract with the defendant's name "B" as the plaintiff's spouse or the defendant's representative director at the construction site No. 20, which the plaintiff designated the above "B".