The plaintiff is engaged in the timber sales business in the trade name of "C".

B. Meanwhile, from February 5, 2006, D operated the manufacture and sales business of a household with the trade name “E”, and the Defendant, who is the wife, registered the business as the trade name “F” on May 1, 2013 upon D’s request, but closed the business on November 30, 2016.

C. The Plaintiff did not enter into a sales contract in writing with the Defendant, but, from February 25, 2016 to March 31, 2017, each time when the Plaintiff supplies timber to F’s location from February 25, 2016 to March 31, 2017, prepared and issued a trading list stating F business partners as the recipient of timber, and issued an electronic tax invoice with the recipient as the Defendant.

In addition, the Plaintiff received the provisional coefficient check issued by the Defendant’s name bank account, which is not D or G, and received the payment of the said purchase price. From January 1, 2016 to March 31, 2017, KRW 115,191,800, out of the purchase price (= KRW 350, KRW 115,191,450, KRW 350, KRW 71,125,964.

2. Determination

A. As to who is an actor or title holder, in cases where an actor who executes a contract was engaged in a juristic act in the name of another person, the contracting party shall first determine the offender or title holder as the party to the contract in accordance with the consent of the actor, if the actor and the other party agree with each other. If the other party fail to agree with each other, then if the other party is reasonable in accordance with the specific circumstances before and after the conclusion of the contract, such as the nature, content, purpose, and circumstance of the contract, etc., the contracting party shall be determined in accordance with

Supreme Court Decision 200 delivered on December 12, 2003