1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff operates the import, export, and distribution business of fishery products, and the Defendant operates the shipping agency, brokerage, etc.

B. On March 4, 2016, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order seeking payment of KRW 4,483,647 and damages for delay on the ground that “the Defendant performed the Plaintiff’s shipping vessel agent business from around 2007 to April 201, and accordingly, the remainder of agency fees that the Plaintiff would pay to the Defendant remains in KRW 7,483,647.” However, on January 29, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for a payment order seeking payment of KRW 3,00,000 and the remainder of KRW 4,483,647.”

C. On July 7, 2017, the Defendant received a payment order as above, and the said payment order became final and conclusive on July 26, 2016.

【Facts without dispute over the ground for recognition, entry of evidence No. 2, and purport of whole pleadings】

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant did not conclude any contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, including shipping vessel agency services claimed by the Defendant.

Only B (referring to C, the representative of the plaintiff) had been operating for five years by leasing a "D" vessel (hereinafter referred to as the "instant vessel"), which is a lively operated carrier, and B trades with the defendant as a contracting party.

B. The defendant from around 2007 to enter into a shipping agency contract for the ship of this case (hereinafter "the contract of this case"). Since the plaintiff is obligated to pay the defendant the balance of agency fees 4,483,647 won under the contract of this case and damages for delay, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

3. Prior to the determination, in consideration of the following facts and circumstances, the parties to the instant contract may comprehensively consider the descriptions of the underlying facts, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-3, Eul evidence 3, Eul evidence 3, 4, and 5-1, 1-2, 3, and the overall purport of the pleadings: