A. On August 22, 2012, an APS Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “APS”) entered into a contract with the Defendant for the transfer of all business rights to restaurants among the trade names, “D,” which is operated by the non-party company at stores in the 8th floor of Suwon-si C department store located in Suwon-si (hereinafter “instant transfer contract”) (hereinafter “instant transfer contract”), and its main contents are as follows.

Article 1 (Transfer of Business Right) A (referring to a company other than a small place) shall transfer to B (the defendant) facilities, shop occupants' right, house fixtures and all other business rights related to the business of the store.

Article 2 (Transfer and Receipt Value) The value of a store transferred or acquired shall be determined by the agreement between A and B, as regards 50 million won out of the unpaid amount of food materials at a store by August 31, 2012, following the agreement between B and B.

B. The Plaintiff is a company that supplied food materials, etc. to Nonparty Company from March 2011 to August 2012. As of August 31, 2012, the amount of the goods price to Nonparty Company reaches KRW 42,073,208.

C. From September 1, 2012, the Defendant operated a business with the trade name “D” and reported the closure of business as of August 1, 2014, and the amount of goods supplied by the Plaintiff was paid to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 6-1, 2, Eul evidence No. 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's primary cause of claim is that the defendant, while entering into a contract for the transfer of business as to "D" and taking over the debt to the plaintiff of the non-party company, the plaintiff is obligated to pay the price of the goods of this case to the plaintiff, and as the conjunctive cause of claim, the defendant continued to use the trade name of the non-party company, which is the transferor of business, and thus the transferee is also liable to pay the price

B. We examine the judgment, and the defendant on August 2012.