The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Suwon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in the event of supplement in the grounds of appeal on March 18, 2019 and on May 20, 2019).

1. For the following reasons, the lower court determined that the Defendant was liable to the Plaintiff for the expressive agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act.

around 2012, C, the Defendant’s mother, lent the Defendant’s name and opened a restaurant with the name of “E” in Gangnam-gu Seoul.

B. The Plaintiff, a high school alumni C, transferred the total of KRW 150 million to the Defendant’s account, which is his/her father and wife, KRW 60 million on January 10, 2012, KRW 70 million on February 3, 2012, KRW 5 million on February 21, 2012, and KRW 150 million on February 22, 2012.

C. C used the said money as lease deposit, shop premium, interior construction cost, etc.

Since the defendant lent the name of the business operator for the operation of the restaurant and the use of the bank account to C, there is a basic power of attorney to C.

E. In light of the fact that C borrowed money from the Plaintiff as above, it was an act beyond the scope of the above basic power of attorney, or that C was engaged in money transaction with the Plaintiff using an account in the Defendant’s name while operating a restaurant under the Defendant’s name, there was justifiable reason to believe that C was the authority to conclude the above loan for consumption.

2. However, it is difficult to accept the above determination by the court below for the following reasons.

In order to claim the effect of an expression agency in excess of the authority stipulated in Article 126 of the Civil Act, it is required that the other party believe that the agent has the right of representation and there is any justifiable reason to believe that the agent has the right of representation in the case where the agent expresses or explicitly expresses his/her intention to act, or performs an act other than his/her authority with the intention of representation. The existence of justifiable reason here is the time when the agent acts as agent