1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, which runs the wholesale and retail business of steel products with the trade name of B, supplied the goods worth KRW 11,559,400 to a place designated by C upon receiving a request from Nonparty C for the delivery of steel products, etc. from January 2012 to February 21, 2013.

B. The Plaintiff received KRW 6,204,000 from C out of the price of the above goods. Of that, five million won was paid from the Defendant’s corporate account to the bank account used by each Plaintiff. Of them, five million won was paid from May 8, 2012 to the Defendant’s corporate account, KRW 2 million on November 9, 2012, and KRW 1 million on December 14, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff requested that Nonparty C deliver the goods to the plaintiff as an employee or partner of the defendant and supplied the goods to the defendant at the construction site designated by C with the knowledge that the claim for the payment was made to the defendant and that it was traded with the defendant. The defendant asserts that as a party who entered into a contract for the supply of goods, the plaintiff is liable to pay damages for delay from February 23, 2013, which is the day following the last delivery of the goods to the plaintiff or the title holder who lent the name to C, the amount of KRW 5,856,40 (= KRW 11,59,400 - KRW 6,204,000 value-added tax of KRW 501,00) and the last delivery of the goods.

B. As seen earlier, the Defendant remitted part of the price of the instant goods to the Plaintiff. However, as to the fact that C requested the Defendant to deliver the goods to the Plaintiff as a Defendant’s employee or partner, the Plaintiff believed the Defendant to be a contracting party, it is insufficient to recognize the Defendant’s claim on the basis of each of the evidence No. 1 and No. 2, and there is no other evidence, so the Defendant ordered C to undertake the construction work by ordering C to undertake the construction work of Samdong-dong Remodeling-dong remodeling on November 2012 under the name of the Defendant, but the Plaintiff from January 201 to January 201.