A. In the trade name of “C”, the Plaintiff is a person who had engaged in the plastic container manufacturing business, etc. (which seems to have been transferred to the present domicile of the Plaintiff), and “E” is an enterprise whose name the Defendant, who is the Plaintiff’s punishment, is registered as a business operator, and the location of the “C” is the same as the location of the location of the said “C”.

B. In the event that the Plaintiff supplies plastic raw materials to E, “E” has manufactured plastic containers as above and supplied them to the Plaintiff. The price that the Plaintiff was not supplied to “E” during the period from January 2017 to August 2017 is KRW 408,682,835.

C. Around August 2017, the Plaintiff discontinued transactions with E, and took over one of the Blocking machines (a machine manufacturing plastic containers; hereinafter “instant machine”). D.

On the other hand, on November 30, 2016, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 25,000,000 to the account under the name of the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 160,120,234 (i.e., KRW 408,682,835 (i.e., KRW 248,562,601) minus the instant mechanical cost of KRW 24,20,234 and loans KRW 25,000,00, total amount of KRW 160,920,234.

B. The purport of the Defendant’s assertion that “E” is the company that the Plaintiff operates in the name of the Defendant, and the Plaintiff created profits from “E” in the manner that orders are given at a low price to “E” at the same place of business at the same location, while operating the two places of business at the same time. In addition, around August 2017, the “E” goes beyond the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff cannot claim the price for the goods within the above period.

Even if the Defendant is recognized as the representative of the E, “E” shall be deemed to have been “C” after January 1, 2016.