A. The Plaintiff is a person who distributes and sells livestock products, etc.

B. From December 2012 to June 2014, the Plaintiff supplied D Yangsan Points located in Yangsan City C and 1 (hereinafter “instant store”) with goods, such as bones ginseng overlaps.

C. The instant store closed around June 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the defendant is obligated to pay the price for the goods and the delay damages to the plaintiff, since the defendant substantially operated the instant store by lending the name of E.

B. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts that the actual operator of the store in this case is F and the defendant only invested money by receiving investment recommendations from F, and that the defendant has no obligation to pay the price for the goods to the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. Therefore, it is problematic whether the Defendant, as the operator of the instant store, is liable to pay the price for the goods supplied by the instant store.

B. In full view of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, evidence Nos. 6 through 9, witness E’s testimony, and witness F’s partial testimony, the following circumstances may be acknowledged.

① There was a discussion on the acquisition and operation of the instant store from September 2013 between the Defendant and F.

② As to the instant store, the Defendant paid KRW 50 million as to the lease deposit.

At the time of December 5, 2013, the Defendant: (a) prepared a certificate of assignment of claims to receive the refund of the said lease deposit from E, the business owner of the instant store, and received confirmation from the lessor G.

③ On October 2, 2013, the Defendant paid KRW 15 million to H, a former occupant of the instant store.

In addition, the defendant transfers to E a total of KRW 1.7 million around October 2013, and KRW 1.7 million around November 2013.