The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion concluded an advertising contract with the Defendant on May 8, 2019 and posted the Defendant’s advertisement on three occasions at “C Press”, but the Defendant paid part of the advertising price. As such, the Plaintiff sought payment of the unpaid advertising price of KRW 920,000 and delay damages.

2. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) the Defendant’s trade name in the column for “matters to be entered” in the advertisement contract signed on May 8, 2019 between the Plaintiff and D; and (b) the term “the relation with the representative” as “the head of the business group.”

Thus, D shall be deemed to have concluded the above advertising contract on behalf of the defendant with the plaintiff, and there is no evidence to prove that D had a legitimate authority to represent the defendant.

(O) According to the statements in Gap's evidence Nos. 3 through 8, and Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul who delivered D and above contracts to the plaintiff is merely an insurance solicitor commissioned by the defendant who runs the insurance agency business, and the advertisement published by the plaintiff is a content of promoting D rather than the defendant, and some advertising fees can be acknowledged as the fact that D was remitted to the defendant). Therefore, the above advertising contract is invalid against the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit without any need to further examine the remainder of the issue.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case should be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance with different conclusions is unfair, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.